| Doc_id | Review | Left | Term | Right | Sentiment | Polarity | Rating |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | This is probably my favorite of the first three courses in the series. The infographic and blogging strategies were very practical and useful. Even though I've been blogging for some time, I got a lot of new ideas. | though I've been blogging for some | Time | I got a lot of new | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | One of the best courses I've taken on Coursera. The lectures are tailored for online learning as opposed to videos of live lectures. They are short and and full of relevant, useful information. This was a huge plus for me because I don't have a lot of extra time to sit through hours and hours of lectures. There were guest lecturers who were experts in the field of social media marketing who provided great insight on the topic. I've utilized many of the strategies learned through this course and the other courses in this Specialization in my own business and have increased my social media following as well as began developing and advertising my blog. | don't have a lot of extra | Time | to sit through hours and hours | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | I really loved the course. It was so useful as at same time I was changing my website and re-doing my blog. Shame i missed timing and couldn't submit my assignments.As english is not my first language it would took some time for me to write on the basis I was taught. Anyways I've done a much better job in portuguese in my blog. I would like to submit an english version of what I've been writing after the course. | was so useful as at same | Time | I was changing my website and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | I really loved the course. It was so useful as at same time I was changing my website and re-doing my blog. Shame i missed timing and couldn't submit my assignments.As english is not my first language it would took some time for me to write on the basis I was taught. Anyways I've done a much better job in portuguese in my blog. I would like to submit an english version of what I've been writing after the course. | first language it would took some | Time | for me to write on the | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| -0BI9jXyEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | good course. Positives: very practical, interesting assignments Development areas: 4 stars because sometimes want more to the point and less not very improtant info in the lections. sorry. for the sake of time In overall, a good course. would recommend | lections. sorry. for the sake of | Time | In overall, a good course. would | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| -1YwAnTLEeSjmyIAC0aXFg | I enjoyed studying the course. Information is given in a very understandable and proffesional way at the same time. I will highly recommend this course. | and proffesional way at the same | Time | I will highly recommend this course. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | it shows how to better communicate one analysis and i have learnt a lot from it. the lectures should be updated as some details and figures were irrelevant a this time | and figures were irrelevant a this | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | This course presented a very useful challenge in terms of data analysis. In one of the projects we're given a data-set that doesn't show straight up what to do with it, even with a clear set of instructions. And this is something common in terms of data analysis that everyone eventually faces with. This isn't the kind of difficult in terms of technicality, but still took me a couple of times to complete because of the maturity and independence needed to just "tackle" the data. I highly recommend it. | still took me a couple of | Time | to complete because of the maturity | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | 1 for Knitr, otherwise it's waste of time. | for Knitr, otherwise it's waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | The first assignment should occur during the second week instead of the first given how the material is presented. The second and final project is very time consuming. Ideally this course should run for 6 weeks instead of 4 because of this. The second project is challenging and it definitely drives home the point about reproducible result given the state of the raw data. | second and final project is very | Time | consuming. Ideally this course should run | Positive | 0.62 | 4.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | By far the most time consuming, yet rewarding course in the data science specialization thus far. Literate Programing in general and R Markdown in particular are simple enough as concepts, but do take some time to grow accustomed to. However, I found the course to be a compelling argument for reproducibility that has application beyond just Data Science proper. Although the technology is completely different, the concepts behind reproducibility really resonated with me and the work I do managing a division in Application Development. I'm constantly having to balance seemingly limitless demands, limited resources, and the difficulty of retaining staff in highly-competitive industry. Reproducibility becomes not just the basis for cross-training, product stabilization, and growth, but is a necessary ingredient of a team's survival. This course not only cemented my own thoughts on the topic, but gave me some new ideas and tools for process improvement on the job. | By far the most | Time | consuming, yet rewarding course in the | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | By far the most time consuming, yet rewarding course in the data science specialization thus far. Literate Programing in general and R Markdown in particular are simple enough as concepts, but do take some time to grow accustomed to. However, I found the course to be a compelling argument for reproducibility that has application beyond just Data Science proper. Although the technology is completely different, the concepts behind reproducibility really resonated with me and the work I do managing a division in Application Development. I'm constantly having to balance seemingly limitless demands, limited resources, and the difficulty of retaining staff in highly-competitive industry. Reproducibility becomes not just the basis for cross-training, product stabilization, and growth, but is a necessary ingredient of a team's survival. This course not only cemented my own thoughts on the topic, but gave me some new ideas and tools for process improvement on the job. | as concepts, but do take some | Time | to grow accustomed to. However, I | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| -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! | also now I spend much less | Time | trying to organise my scripts, data | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | I very much enjoyed this course. It provided background on environmental law and introduced me to some common law doctrines as environmental law. Good investment of time. | as environmental law. Good investment of | Time | | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | Wonderful breakdown of cases over time that cite each other. Excellent introduction to Environmental Law. | Wonderful breakdown of cases over | Time | that cite each other. Excellent introduction | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | I really liked the structure of the lesson plan and the individual lectures. It is told almost like a story with parts for you to test your recall and understanding of the unfolding adventure. Really good course and very much worth the time. | course and very much worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | I enjoyed the course and especially enjoyed Donald Hornstein's teaching style - upbeat, dynamic, funny at times and interesting always. I actually looked forward to each lesson throughout the course. Thanks... | style - upbeat, dynamic, funny at | Time | and interesting always. I actually looked | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| -A_ToPNPEeSAEiIAC9TCSQ | the course was fantastic especially the 1 minute lawyer segments. Not sure if it is a site problem, problem with the course or with my machine but I frequently had times where the picture would freeze and audio would continue. The videos while informative were also quite long and it might have been a better idea to divide each 20 minute video into 2 smaller ones. Otherwise though it was a great course by a fantastic professor. | my machine but I frequently had | Time | where the picture would freeze and | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Fun Course and very interesting!! Well worth the time. | very interesting! ! Well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Great simple but at the same time precise and scientific course to help people understand what dog cognition is. I definitely do recommend this course! | Great simple but at the same | Time | precise and scientific course to help | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I really liked this course. I have owned and trained dogs from a very early time in my life. I found it very interesting how dogs evolved from wolves and how that is apparent in dogs today. I typically like courses to be heavy on the science side, but this class was well presented for mid-level people or people who don't have a science background. Of course people will disagree with some of the material but overall it was an interesting class and the book recommended for the class was a good read. Mahalo from Hawaii | trained dogs from a very early | Time | in my life. I found it | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | This course is for you if you love dogs, and/or are interested in the science of animal behavior. Dr. Hare's presentations are interesting, informative and fun. I loved his use of scientific studies, videos, and Russian history (yes!) to get his points across. His book (optional) and the dog games (also optional) only add more depth to his lectures, but don't feel you need to buy the book and/or the games...you can take the online course and do just fine (but hopefully you'll want to read more, and participate as a citizen scientist, after taking the online course!). I will recommend this class to my canine_enthusiast friends, as I found Dr. Hare's class to re-evaluate how I look at the thought processes of dogs. This course is time well-spent! | processes of dogs. This course is | Time | well-spent! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Good information contained within the course which has sparked my interest in continuing to learn and build on my small amount of knowledge. Lower rating than I would usually give for a course because of the way the lectures are delivered. Having a lecturer standing in front of a brick wall, plugging his book and not really connecting with online students was not great. A couple of times during the lectures I dozed off and had to re-run them. If the plugging of own material was removed and the background and tone of voice were altered this could be a captivating and interesting course. | was not great. A couple of | Time | during the lectures I dozed off | Negative | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I was really disappointed in this "course" for several reasons. I did not complete it, because it was really not worth spending time on. The organizer impressed me as only wanting to sell copies of his book on dog behavior and used the course as his vehicle. Then there were games to "purchase" online to facilitate teaching my dog cognitive skills. The videos were lacking in creativity. I was really disappointed with this, especially since its a cool topic that could easily be presented in a very exciting way. The artistic level, the videos, slides, etc were something a high school student could pull together. After taking solid courses like ModPo and Positive Psychology, I was amazed at the lack of effort that was put into this. | it was really not worth spending | Time | on. The organizer impressed me as | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I had a great time learning all these new thing not just about dogs, but also about apes, evolution and cognitive approach to all species. | I had a great | Time | learning all these new thing not | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I did enjoy this course, but at times I felt a little bored, like it was loosing my interest. Some of the information given was more about other species and I think that's what made it less gripping for me. | did enjoy this course, but at | Time | I felt a little bored, like | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | This was an amazing course! The format was fantastic and easy to follow and Dr. Brian hare was an engaging speaker, which the videos wonderful to watch. I also really liked that it was self-paced because then I could really try out the Dognition exercises with my dog and have the time to read the book. | with my dog and have the | Time | to read the book. | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Overall, I enjoyed this course, but it gave just a bit too much information on cognitive studies in other species, and it left me still wanting to learn more about dogs. The last 2 weeks were great! The professor was engaging and his work was very interesting, but he said ummm and ahhh so many times that it was a little distracting. The quizzes were good, but some of the questions were worded very oddly so I just couldn't get them right without several attempts. I didn't feel like he covered dog emotion at all. I thought there would be some discussion of facial expressions, the meaning of different tail wags, and the extent of dog emotion (for example, how they grieve and how long they grieve after a loss). | said ummm and ahhh so many | Time | that it was a little distracting. | Positive | 0.65 | 3.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | This is a relatively easy course to complete, but I definitely enjoyed learning about dog cognition and how they have evolved over time to become man's best friend. | and how they have evolved over | Time | to become man's best friend. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | I really enjoyed the material of this course. Well worth the money paid. I feel that I learned a lot. I definitely suggest reading the book also. The only issue I had with the course is that there were a couple times wording on the quizzes were incorrect/misleading | is that there were a couple | Time | wording on the quizzes were incorrect/misleading | Negative | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Interesting insights about how dogs think and what we perceive through their behavior. Taken purely for personal enrichment. Wish I'd had more time available to work with the lab material. | personal enrichment. Wish I'd had more | Time | available to work with the lab | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | This course was a minimal time commitment, simple, and very interesting for the lay person and scientist alike. It's fantastic to see an open online course offered on a subject that has exploded in the last few years! | This course was a minimal | Time | commitment, simple, and very interesting for | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| -GA2-bmnEeWkwBIgnN7tuw | This course is ideal for anyone interested in community-oriented public health. It's worth the time and effort. | community-oriented public health. It's worth the | Time | and effort. | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | While the subject matter was extremely relevant, I didn't think this course was taught well. Much of the lecture and exercise focused on providing direction than actually teaching. I felt as though I was just copying and pasting sample code. At times it was as though the professor was rushing to introduce new modules rather than discussing how and why certain concepts should be used. In most cases, I could have learned the Ionic modules just as well by reading the documentation and looking at sample code, which is often what this course felt like. I'd have much rather seen the concepts explained in more detail than rushing to add new modules without any context. The quizzes are not challenging (the professor always puts the correct answer as the first choice) and the exercises just provide cut/paste code snippets without any reasoning or explanation. I would have preferred to have the exercises conducted by providing a high level goal and then a solution to check against rather than the "put this code here" approach that's used. The assignment grading is either far too obvious (whether a required module was injected or not) or completely arbitrary. Generally the assignments lacked nuance and complexity as well. I didn't feel like I really learned any of the concepts behind this material after going through the course. | copying and pasting sample code. At | Time | it was as though the professor | Negative | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I think this knowledge is quite irrelevant right now. When developing apps you don't want to use Hybrid Mobile App Development approach, rather native development for different platforms. It would be better to explore server-side technologies in more depth then waste time on something that almost no one uses right now. | technologies in more depth then waste | Time | on something that almost no one | Negative | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | A massive thanks to Prof. Muppala - this course provides a very gentle and easy to access entry into the world of app development. I tried to get into Android Studio and Xcode before and was overwhelmed by both - taking this approach made it a lot easier for me to get started and the course layout (especially in conjunction with the previous course about AngularJS) provided me with just the right tools and concepts at the right time and pace! | tools and concepts at the right | Time | and pace! | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Good course, but the development cycle is hard and I had to suffer a lot when it comes to the device emulations . I know the time is short, but I would be happy if you can provide a course or some helpful links. The first two weeks are nice to develop, because of the ionic serve --watch. | device emulations . I know the | Time | is short, but I would be | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This course serves as a great introduction to mobile web development. Notice that multiplatform in this case means iOS and Android (no Windows Phone) and you do get a bit of hands on work on Android SDK and XCode, although mostly for setting up both environments. Professor Muppala is again outstanding in the class, covering a wide range of topics combined with multiple exercises which in my case really furthered my understanding. One thing I believe could improve would be having either at least one assignment forcing you to deploy to Android and another one to iOS. In my case, it was just too comfortable to simply deploy to an iOS device and barely look at Android. Also, the vibration function should not be part of an assignment, as not everyone will have a device to test it and neither of the emulators really use it. One final recommendation for those pressed with time: I was able to follow Professor Muppala quite easily while playing the lectures at 1.75x (it's funny how slow he seems to speak when I set in back to 1x :-) ). | final recommendation for those pressed with | Time | I was able to follow Professor | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I got the feeling that we ran through the material and did not spend ample time setting up the testing and understanding the environment. Maybe the course need to be two weeks to cover this properly. | material and did not spend ample | Time | setting up the testing and understanding | Negative | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I took the initial offering of this courser. It is an excellent class that I am sure will only improve over time. Prof. Muppala is a wonderful instructor and I learned so much in this course. My only suggestion would be to clarify some of the grading details as there were some questions on certain items in the last assignment. I would definitely recommend this series of courses and I am looking forward to taking the final course in this Full Stack Web Development series. | am sure will only improve over | Time | Prof. Muppala is a wonderful instructor | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Course was great. I learnt so many things in less time. Thank you professor Muppala | learnt so many things in less | Time | Thank you professor Muppala | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| -gcU5xn4EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I am taking this course now, It is amazing to be able to develop IOS and Android Mobile apps and the same time. A good tip, you need to see the previous course about angular to understand better this about Ionic. | Android Mobile apps and the same | Time | A good tip, you need to | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | For me, this course was disappointing. Here is why: First, the level, at which the course material is presented, is very low. It might be freshman level, but certainly not more. There are many buzzwords but no real explanations. The programming assignments are only doable because most of the work has been done by the people designing the assignments. There is very little left for the students. Furthermore, the procedures, that are already given, are not very well documented. Hence, a lot of guess work is required to figure out how things should work. Furthermore, little effort has been spent to structure the procedures that are already given. Altogether, this makes doing the programming assignments very unsatisfying. Finally, the professor presenting the materials does not take part in the discussion forums. Contrary to other courses that I have attended at Coursera, this time the discussion forum was no help at all. | I have attended at Coursera, this | Time | the discussion forum was no help | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Another super course. Though admittedly (for me at least) very difficult to make within the allotted time given for one period of the Course. Lots of advanced stuff that require substantial studies to really comprehend, i.e., it should never be enough just to hack & run the code (that's the easier challenge). Still have a long washing list of topics coming out of this Course that I need (want) to understand better. But at least the background to do so is neatly provided here. So without further ado ... Applause! | difficult to make within the allotted | Time | given for one period of the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The assignments are excellent and help understand the algorithms and concepts taught in the course. There are some garbling in the subtitles/transcripts (including the quirky one that every time the lecturer says EM - the "EM" doesn't appear, and the following word is capitalized). As usual Graphlab Create / Sframes can't handle apply(). however mostly apply() appears in the part of the assignment that inputs files and turns them into data matrices and the explanations how to run the assignment with Scikit-Learn include pre-computed input files | (including the quirky one that every | Time | the lecturer says EM - the | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The retrieval part of this course is great, it deserve five starts. The clustering part was going well until it reached LDA. The LDA module is very poorly covered, and also very hard to understand. I had to watch the videos more than two times to try to figure out what was LDA, and a Quora article posted in the Forum could explain it much better. Then we get to the Hierarchical Clustering module, which was the most poorly module in all this specialization. There is only one video talking about HMM models, and Markov Chains deserve at least one week to even get started with it. And to complete, there is just one Assignment with only 3 questions. The specialization was going perfect until now. I am very disappointed with this course. I hope the last two courses are much better covered and not just ran over like this this one was. | watch the videos more than two | Time | to try to figure out what | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Yet another really excellent course in this series - the best online course I have ever taken. I really appreciate the fairly high level on which it is taught, and the speed with which they go through the material - it is not here to entertain or waste time, but to get straight to the point - what can I do, and how do I use open source tools to do it? | not here to entertain or waste | Time | but to get straight to the | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | I used to run into a wall at work trying to train models with recursive partitioning or neural nets because of the long time they took to train for high dimensional data. These clustering techniques are an immense help. Awesome course, with a brilliant instructor and brilliant assignments. | neural nets because of the long | Time | they took to train for high | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | great course, but module 4 lacks a bit in structure. hard to follow. without the forum, it would not be possible to make it in time. | be possible to make it in | Time | | Negative | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| -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. | were often unclear and it took | Time | to figure out what is expected | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | While I did not have time to complete the final assignment I did find this course useful for creating a firmer understanding of Ableton Live. The peer review process is a great idea and something which I found to be both engaging and useful for networking with fellow artists. The content of the course I feel is probably useful to someone with no prior knowledge of DAWs, but this is not my first DAW. As such the course felt a little slow and the assignments a little unchallenging. Personally my peer review experience ranged from listening to fully fleshed out ideas to listening to uninspired loops of nonsense. I still feel as though I benefited from the process, however, and I gained an invaluable resource in Blend. I would love a next level - fleshing out some of the ideas touched on throughout the course, as well as exploring other ideas such as sidechaining. | While I did not have | Time | to complete the final assignment I | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | This course covers a lot of ground in a short period of time, and does it in a way that makes it easy to quickly leverage the power of Ableton in production and live performance. I appreciated the simplicity and thoroughness of the videos, and the assignments kept me motivated. It's a great class for complete beginners, as well as intermediate users in need of a brush up. Erin has a good approach to teaching: she's efficient and clear, and her basic examples don't overwhelm the student. | ground in a short period of | Time | and does it in a way | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | Great course! For very short time you'll learn so many amazing things. You will know in depth one professional software for music composition. You'll create 3 compositions which will be placed in musical website and hundreds or thousand of other musicians will hear it and vote for it. You will be part of wonderful group of other musicians like you taking part in the same course. You will be able to discuss with them important subject's... Great course. Thank you, Erin, David! | Great course! For very short | Time | you'll learn so many amazing things. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | This course is a challenging into to Ableton Live. It is well worth the time for even experienced producers who are new to Ableton Live. I first got Ableton Live in November 2015. It is now January 2016 and I feel like I have come a long way thanks to this course. | Live. It is well worth the | Time | for even experienced producers who are | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. The time commitment required for each week's assignment was perfect. I learned several techniques to aid me in going forward in my musical endeavors and look forward to many years of continuing to explore Ableton Live. | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. The | Time | commitment required for each week's assignment | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | I enjoyed very much the lessons and I had a very good time on preparing the assignment on Ableton. A great course. | and I had a very good | Time | on preparing the assignment on Ableton. | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | This is an amazing course ! it is my second time taking it. Instructor Erin Barra does a great job with the tutorials, she really knows her stuff. | course ! it is my second | Time | taking it. Instructor Erin Barra does | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | I have being waiting for this a long time :) | being waiting for this a long | Time | :) | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | I'm now taking this course a second time because it is so absolutely helpful and has really given me a free and friendly place to learn how to use Ableton and get started on music production! | now taking this course a second | Time | because it is so absolutely helpful | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | It was fun. Have peer review is helpful. However, it was mainly one time comment. It would be great to start conversation and interaction among course takers. | helpful. However, it was mainly one | Time | comment. It would be great to | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | Real a great course if you are looking to learn the basics of Ableton Live 9 or just need a refresher after the break. Erin does a wonderful job of explaining the basics with out overloading you with to much information. Each assignment is to make a song. It starts with basic stuff and works toward more advanced stuff near the end. It's helped motivate me to put more time into making music and use the tools and software that I have at my disposal. A personal thanks to Erin, this class is just what I needed! | helped motivate me to put more | Time | into making music and use the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | Fantastic Course, i have saved the videos so i can review them again. I thoroughly enjoyed it, all over again. This was the second time i joined Introduction to Ableton Live but this time i decided to get my verified Certificate yay! Thank you Erin! | over again. This was the second | Time | i joined Introduction to Ableton Live | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| -nRRAPmuEeSndSIAC7LTLQ | Fantastic Course, i have saved the videos so i can review them again. I thoroughly enjoyed it, all over again. This was the second time i joined Introduction to Ableton Live but this time i decided to get my verified Certificate yay! Thank you Erin! | Introduction to Ableton Live but this | Time | i decided to get my verified | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | I enjoyed the course a lot! It's amazing how it is simple and thrilling at the same time. You have an opportunity to create simple but cool games which make you feel so proud of yourself. My kids tried out the games I created later on and were amazed too! So thank you a lot for the course! | simple and thrilling at the same | Time | You have an opportunity to create | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | I love Prof. Areti!! She's amazing! This is first time I've come so far in any course I've taken in Coursera; partly because programming is actually fun, but also because this course is structured beautifully to teach students how to understand the logic behind programs and implement &/or improvise the same concepts in their own creations. With this, I shall say I am determined to complete the Code Yourself! course :) | ! She's amazing! This is first | Time | I've come so far in any | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This is a great course for beginners for sure. I loved the teacher and would do more courses she teaches for sure. The only thing I would have to say is that the last task was a bit difficult for some of the coding and there was no assistance of someone I could have reached out to. i.e. if I was having a hard time with a certain aspect in Scratch that I had a difficult time with, I would have loved somehow to ask for assistance to better understand what I was doing wrong and/or why it was not working | if I was having a hard | Time | with a certain aspect in Scratch | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This is a great course for beginners for sure. I loved the teacher and would do more courses she teaches for sure. The only thing I would have to say is that the last task was a bit difficult for some of the coding and there was no assistance of someone I could have reached out to. i.e. if I was having a hard time with a certain aspect in Scratch that I had a difficult time with, I would have loved somehow to ask for assistance to better understand what I was doing wrong and/or why it was not working | Scratch that I had a difficult | Time | with, I would have loved somehow | Positive | 0.77 | 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! | points but also distracting at other | Time | // Also, I only realized halfway | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | You will have to make a Scratch account (free) for this course. Areti is a very clear instructor that explained concepts very well for complete beginners into programming, like myself and I found the course insightful. 1) Presentation - I couldn't help but wonder whether they had a lower target age (teenagers or younger) in mind, which was entertaining at some points but also distracting at other times. // Also, I only realized halfway through the course that it is in fact possible to see what Areti is doing on the Scratch program once the quality of the video is adjusted. 2) Projects/Time Commitment - Going through the lectures and quizzes are not time consuming at all, but the projects (especially the final project) takes a lot of time. It took longer than expected because I felt like much of the practical instructions on how to use Scratch for specific purposes were not provided during the course, leaving me to work by myself. 3) Discussion Forum - When I took the course, the discussion forum was close to being dead (especially compared to some of the other courses that I was taking simultaneously on Coursera). Gerry (mentor) did an amazing job responding to my inquiry, but I noticed that although there were a lot of students talking at the beginning, introducing themselves, there weren't that many discussions concerning the final assignment, making me feel like I was working alone. It would be great if there was more time to work on the final project, and perhaps a way in which students can collaborate and help out others when faced with a bug (ie preliminary project submission and feedback session). I recommend taking this course, but realistically, you won't be program proficient after 5 weeks. You will, however, learn some basic programming theory, understand how programming works, and learn how to make a fun interactive game on Scratch! | the lectures and quizzes are not | Time | consuming at all, but the projects | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | You will have to make a Scratch account (free) for this course. Areti is a very clear instructor that explained concepts very well for complete beginners into programming, like myself and I found the course insightful. 1) Presentation - I couldn't help but wonder whether they had a lower target age (teenagers or younger) in mind, which was entertaining at some points but also distracting at other times. // Also, I only realized halfway through the course that it is in fact possible to see what Areti is doing on the Scratch program once the quality of the video is adjusted. 2) Projects/Time Commitment - Going through the lectures and quizzes are not time consuming at all, but the projects (especially the final project) takes a lot of time. It took longer than expected because I felt like much of the practical instructions on how to use Scratch for specific purposes were not provided during the course, leaving me to work by myself. 3) Discussion Forum - When I took the course, the discussion forum was close to being dead (especially compared to some of the other courses that I was taking simultaneously on Coursera). Gerry (mentor) did an amazing job responding to my inquiry, but I noticed that although there were a lot of students talking at the beginning, introducing themselves, there weren't that many discussions concerning the final assignment, making me feel like I was working alone. It would be great if there was more time to work on the final project, and perhaps a way in which students can collaborate and help out others when faced with a bug (ie preliminary project submission and feedback session). I recommend taking this course, but realistically, you won't be program proficient after 5 weeks. You will, however, learn some basic programming theory, understand how programming works, and learn how to make a fun interactive game on Scratch! | final project) takes a lot of | Time | It took longer than expected because | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | You will have to make a Scratch account (free) for this course. Areti is a very clear instructor that explained concepts very well for complete beginners into programming, like myself and I found the course insightful. 1) Presentation - I couldn't help but wonder whether they had a lower target age (teenagers or younger) in mind, which was entertaining at some points but also distracting at other times. // Also, I only realized halfway through the course that it is in fact possible to see what Areti is doing on the Scratch program once the quality of the video is adjusted. 2) Projects/Time Commitment - Going through the lectures and quizzes are not time consuming at all, but the projects (especially the final project) takes a lot of time. It took longer than expected because I felt like much of the practical instructions on how to use Scratch for specific purposes were not provided during the course, leaving me to work by myself. 3) Discussion Forum - When I took the course, the discussion forum was close to being dead (especially compared to some of the other courses that I was taking simultaneously on Coursera). Gerry (mentor) did an amazing job responding to my inquiry, but I noticed that although there were a lot of students talking at the beginning, introducing themselves, there weren't that many discussions concerning the final assignment, making me feel like I was working alone. It would be great if there was more time to work on the final project, and perhaps a way in which students can collaborate and help out others when faced with a bug (ie preliminary project submission and feedback session). I recommend taking this course, but realistically, you won't be program proficient after 5 weeks. You will, however, learn some basic programming theory, understand how programming works, and learn how to make a fun interactive game on Scratch! | be great if there was more | Time | to work on the final project, | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | I thoroughly enjoyed this class. Put in the time to really understand the deeper usefulness of thinking like a programmer, and this course is very helpful. Scratch is a very fun way to learn about how to code, and gave me a nice foothold for beginning Java programming. | enjoyed this class. Put in the | Time | to really understand the deeper usefulness | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This is the first time that I've taken a course just for the fun and engagement it provides. For years I've tried to learn programming and have found the courses and books rather intimidating and/or boring. This course is fun, practical and certainly covers all the basics. Thank you for demystifying this subject for me! | This is the first | Time | that I've taken a course just | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | Very helpful course for anyone who plans to use any form of programming. Helps you to wrap your head around the terms and their meaning. I have found having taken this course as being helpful now that I am taking a course covering JavaScript. The instructor on this course is EXCELLENT with presentation and is enjoyable. The class demands a lot of hands-on time, but is fun if you enjoy solving problems and making things work. | class demands a lot of hands-on | Time | but is fun if you enjoy | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This is a great introductory programming course for anyone. It covers the basics of programming and prepares you for more advanced programming like java. If you can play with LEGOs you can do this course, yet it is still fun and challenging for the genuinely tech savvy. It's also a good creative outlet. The professor is cool and sweet, and although it sometimes feels like she had kids in mind for this course, the students are very diverse. Thanks Areti, I had a heck of a lot of fun!!! Now, it's midnight here, time for some Java (and some coffee too)!!! | ! ! Now, it's midnight here, | Time | for some Java (and some coffee | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | Interesting method for teaching programming. Very basic. Very visual. It was worth my time. | Very visual. It was worth my | Time | | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This is an excellent introduction to programming. The exercises are very dynamic and the tutors did a great job by explaining the program, both in English and Spanish. The bonus interview might seem like extra time but it's totally worth it. The only recommendation for the class is not to rush the exercises after the 3 week. Thank you! | bonus interview might seem like extra | Time | but it's totally worth it. The | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | The course was highly informative, entertainingly presented and does not require an unreasonable amount of time to complete. It serves well as an introduction to programming, especially the two course projects, where the peer review system works well. The instructors and mentors show a commitment to helping students and improving the already well-run course. An unusual and welcome feature of this Coursera course is the immediate verification of one's typing. My only criticism is the lack of downloadable written/pdf material related to the course, although students who go on to learn programming languages will likely relearn much of the knowledge they gained here. | not require an unreasonable amount of | Time | to complete. It serves well as | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | Difficult course but very worthwhile your time | Difficult course but very worthwhile your | Time | | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | This course is brilliant. It presents a complicated topic with some details, taking non-experts in Biology, like me, to a good understanding. It is worth remembering the main elements in the course from time to time, so I am retaking this course (at least the videos) to refresh my memory. Wonderful course. I truly recommend it. | main elements in the course from | Time | to time, so I am retaking | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | This course is brilliant. It presents a complicated topic with some details, taking non-experts in Biology, like me, to a good understanding. It is worth remembering the main elements in the course from time to time, so I am retaking this course (at least the videos) to refresh my memory. Wonderful course. I truly recommend it. | in the course from time to | Time | so I am retaking this course | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | Good course with many aspects and details in the field of epigenetics. I think it is better to formulate the course at more weeks because there is much information at short time. The courses in specialised scientific field should get details like this course. | there is much information at short | Time | The courses in specialised scientific field | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | Love this course. I don't have enough time to devote to it but I still get a lot out of it. | this course. I don't have enough | Time | to devote to it but I | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| -zH9iof2EeWGBwqGAoUFww | boring lecturer, monotone, passionless reading of even more boring powerpoint slides and images, and absolutely no intelligent discussion going on in this course, I have learned more from reading the book "the epigenetics revolution " by nessa carey, a book written for laypersons, than I have from this course taught by university professors. don't waste your time | by university professors. don't waste your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 01XLylXyEeWKXg4Y7_tPaw | This is not an Introduction but a Review of Machine Learning methods used in Yandex. Probably, you have to multiply estimated required time by 10 to really understand lecture topics. Kaggle competition at the end makes the course really interesting. but: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." -- Ernest Rutherford | you have to multiply estimated required | Time | by 10 to really understand lecture | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | For the first time I really understood some stuffs that I'd never knew. Thank you so much! | For the first | Time | I really understood some stuffs that | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Excellent course, definitely worth taking if you have free time and are willing to expand your kn | worth taking if you have free | Time | and are willing to expand your | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | I found the course really useful and informative and the teacher was very enigmatic and engaging. My only comment would be that perhaps the teacher goes through the slides slightly too quickly at times,as I found myself often pausing to read them. Excellent course though. | the slides slightly too quickly at | Time | as I found myself often pausing | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Good course for Non-finance people or people who interact too much with the financial chaps. With this course, One will not sit as a duck from the next time he / she sit in the business plan or other meetings, where price, cost, revenue, profit, performance, etc are disuccsed. | as a duck from the next | Time | he / she sit in the | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Very important concepts of finance covered in very short time. Very useful. | of finance covered in very short | Time | Very useful. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Pretty hard to Keep track but the content was good. I probably need to be a bit more focussed next time. | be a bit more focussed next | Time | | Positive | 0.62 | 2.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | A lot of formulas in a few time. But the professor uses lots of examples which allow to better (and faster) understand the concepts behind all those formulas. | lot of formulas in a few | Time | But the professor uses lots of | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | A very nicely addressed course for the non-financial professions to apprehend. Short and to-the-point. However, if the course provided a non-paid certificate, just for keeping purposes, it would have attracted a wider audience. But overall, worth putting efforts and time into ! | But overall, worth putting efforts and | Time | into ! | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | It was a great learning experience. Professor not only teaches the concepts but socialise common law principles, structures and history through examples and discussion. At the same time, a very generous initiative by coursera to provide learning opportunity for underprivileged. | examples and discussion. At the same | Time | a very generous initiative by coursera | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 0ayiYtaOEeWvEArBkQ8C9Q | Great course, obviously provides for a foundation, in the time span of the course; spurs one on to seek more in-depth knowledge. | provides for a foundation, in the | Time | span of the course; spurs one | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 0HiU7Oe4EeWTAQ4yevf_oQ | Aside from a little hiccup with one of the quiz questions during week 1, this course was worth my time. | 1, this course was worth my | Time | | Negative | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 1AAvk3H7EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Thank you for sharing us the guidance for creating the Capstone Project, the final Course under Specialization - Journalism, Report the News! Enjoyed it very much, also the time spent to review my peers objectively as much as I enjoyed reading their reviews. Is there going to be other related writing studies from MSU through Coursera? Best Regards, Monika Pandiangan (Monik) | Enjoyed it very much, also the | Time | spent to review my peers objectively | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 1b9VUDu6EeWdUgozVKt3nw | Not enough face to camera time, in comparison with the other two modules in this course specialization. For me, that made it harder to recall the information effectively. But a very interesting topic. | Not enough face to camera | Time | in comparison with the other two | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Good information, and detailed mathematical representation of the concepts, but often you will have to do outside research to truly understand the material, and the building blocks are not very helpful beyond a basic refresher course on matrices and statistics. This class requires a lot of studying and initiative to seek outside help to understand the material. If more time was dedicated to truly explaining the concepts and principles and the REASONING behind them instead of just supplying equations and test names, this class would get a 5 star rating. | to understand the material. If more | Time | was dedicated to truly explaining the | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I find this course excellent. It is a well balanced course in combining econometric theory and its application. The fact is that to apply econometric theory one needs to understand fair bit of econometric method (that includes matrix algebra, some properties of inner product space etc.) as well as how to apply those concepts in practice. In this respect this course does serve its purpose very well. Overall, this course focuses some fundamental aspects and properties of cross-sectional data and time series data. Therefore, it provides one a good foundation (over 8 weeks) so that one can carry out one's future quest regarding any empirical topic by oneself ! I admit that modern econometric theory develops more sophisticated techniques but all of them share one common aspect i.e. they are based on more or less the same fundamentals or properties. Indeed, this course has been designed carefully by targeting those fundamentals and properties. Thus it might be very helpful to follow the modern econometric techniques. However, this course does not talk about the panel data analysis, which share both the cross-sectional and time series properties (more or less). In my opinion it might be better to have at least additional one week session on panel data. In particular, when the data set shares both cross-sectional and time series properties, which set of properties will be dominant or how the estimation technique incorporates the variation of two dimensions (i.e. cross-sectional and time ) etc. Finally, I like to thank all the teaching members and moderators of this course. I have enjoyed the lecture slides and videos very much. | and properties of cross-sectional data and | Time | series data. Therefore, it provides one | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I find this course excellent. It is a well balanced course in combining econometric theory and its application. The fact is that to apply econometric theory one needs to understand fair bit of econometric method (that includes matrix algebra, some properties of inner product space etc.) as well as how to apply those concepts in practice. In this respect this course does serve its purpose very well. Overall, this course focuses some fundamental aspects and properties of cross-sectional data and time series data. Therefore, it provides one a good foundation (over 8 weeks) so that one can carry out one's future quest regarding any empirical topic by oneself ! I admit that modern econometric theory develops more sophisticated techniques but all of them share one common aspect i.e. they are based on more or less the same fundamentals or properties. Indeed, this course has been designed carefully by targeting those fundamentals and properties. Thus it might be very helpful to follow the modern econometric techniques. However, this course does not talk about the panel data analysis, which share both the cross-sectional and time series properties (more or less). In my opinion it might be better to have at least additional one week session on panel data. In particular, when the data set shares both cross-sectional and time series properties, which set of properties will be dominant or how the estimation technique incorporates the variation of two dimensions (i.e. cross-sectional and time ) etc. Finally, I like to thank all the teaching members and moderators of this course. I have enjoyed the lecture slides and videos very much. | which share both the cross-sectional and | Time | series properties (more or less). In | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I find this course excellent. It is a well balanced course in combining econometric theory and its application. The fact is that to apply econometric theory one needs to understand fair bit of econometric method (that includes matrix algebra, some properties of inner product space etc.) as well as how to apply those concepts in practice. In this respect this course does serve its purpose very well. Overall, this course focuses some fundamental aspects and properties of cross-sectional data and time series data. Therefore, it provides one a good foundation (over 8 weeks) so that one can carry out one's future quest regarding any empirical topic by oneself ! I admit that modern econometric theory develops more sophisticated techniques but all of them share one common aspect i.e. they are based on more or less the same fundamentals or properties. Indeed, this course has been designed carefully by targeting those fundamentals and properties. Thus it might be very helpful to follow the modern econometric techniques. However, this course does not talk about the panel data analysis, which share both the cross-sectional and time series properties (more or less). In my opinion it might be better to have at least additional one week session on panel data. In particular, when the data set shares both cross-sectional and time series properties, which set of properties will be dominant or how the estimation technique incorporates the variation of two dimensions (i.e. cross-sectional and time ) etc. Finally, I like to thank all the teaching members and moderators of this course. I have enjoyed the lecture slides and videos very much. | data set shares both cross-sectional and | Time | series properties, which set of properties | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I find this course excellent. It is a well balanced course in combining econometric theory and its application. The fact is that to apply econometric theory one needs to understand fair bit of econometric method (that includes matrix algebra, some properties of inner product space etc.) as well as how to apply those concepts in practice. In this respect this course does serve its purpose very well. Overall, this course focuses some fundamental aspects and properties of cross-sectional data and time series data. Therefore, it provides one a good foundation (over 8 weeks) so that one can carry out one's future quest regarding any empirical topic by oneself ! I admit that modern econometric theory develops more sophisticated techniques but all of them share one common aspect i.e. they are based on more or less the same fundamentals or properties. Indeed, this course has been designed carefully by targeting those fundamentals and properties. Thus it might be very helpful to follow the modern econometric techniques. However, this course does not talk about the panel data analysis, which share both the cross-sectional and time series properties (more or less). In my opinion it might be better to have at least additional one week session on panel data. In particular, when the data set shares both cross-sectional and time series properties, which set of properties will be dominant or how the estimation technique incorporates the variation of two dimensions (i.e. cross-sectional and time ) etc. Finally, I like to thank all the teaching members and moderators of this course. I have enjoyed the lecture slides and videos very much. | two dimensions (i. e. cross-sectional and | Time | ) etc. Finally, I like to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | This course is not for someone who hasn't taken much advanced math. There's a strong requirement of linear algebra, calculus, and probability. Someone who is relying only on the math prep they give you in the course will likely be very under-prepared for some of the more theoretical homework assignments. With that disclaimer out of the way, this course gives a fairly good overview of important econometric techniques, though I wish they would have done more with time series analysis. A major shortcoming of this course is some of the more complicated material (RESET test, Chow test, endogeneity, etc) were not presented in a complete way (in my opinion). I found myself referring to quite a few outside sources in order to figure out some of the more complicated material. Keep this in mind when taking the class and give yourself extra time to read farther into the concepts discussed in class. | they would have done more with | Time | series analysis. A major shortcoming of | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | This course is not for someone who hasn't taken much advanced math. There's a strong requirement of linear algebra, calculus, and probability. Someone who is relying only on the math prep they give you in the course will likely be very under-prepared for some of the more theoretical homework assignments. With that disclaimer out of the way, this course gives a fairly good overview of important econometric techniques, though I wish they would have done more with time series analysis. A major shortcoming of this course is some of the more complicated material (RESET test, Chow test, endogeneity, etc) were not presented in a complete way (in my opinion). I found myself referring to quite a few outside sources in order to figure out some of the more complicated material. Keep this in mind when taking the class and give yourself extra time to read farther into the concepts discussed in class. | the class and give yourself extra | Time | to read farther into the concepts | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Very useful course for those who want to learn what is behind econometric tools and what their limitations are. The combination between practice and theory makes it an exciting learning experience that is worth the time investment. For those, like myself, that were not 100% up to speed at the start, a significant time investment is needed. To finish the course I had to spend in excess of 20 hours a week to satisfactorily understand the material and be able to reproduce the main takeaways. I am sure the course can be successfully completed with less effort, but grasping the essence of the material made sense to me as I am trying to get a better idea of how to use econometric tools. Conclusion: it is completely worth your time, but if you are not sufficiently well versed in math and statistics, basic college level, you will need to make a significant time investment to make full use of the material. | learning experience that is worth the | Time | investment. For those, like myself, that | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Very useful course for those who want to learn what is behind econometric tools and what their limitations are. The combination between practice and theory makes it an exciting learning experience that is worth the time investment. For those, like myself, that were not 100% up to speed at the start, a significant time investment is needed. To finish the course I had to spend in excess of 20 hours a week to satisfactorily understand the material and be able to reproduce the main takeaways. I am sure the course can be successfully completed with less effort, but grasping the essence of the material made sense to me as I am trying to get a better idea of how to use econometric tools. Conclusion: it is completely worth your time, but if you are not sufficiently well versed in math and statistics, basic college level, you will need to make a significant time investment to make full use of the material. | speed at the start, a significant | Time | investment is needed. To finish the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Very useful course for those who want to learn what is behind econometric tools and what their limitations are. The combination between practice and theory makes it an exciting learning experience that is worth the time investment. For those, like myself, that were not 100% up to speed at the start, a significant time investment is needed. To finish the course I had to spend in excess of 20 hours a week to satisfactorily understand the material and be able to reproduce the main takeaways. I am sure the course can be successfully completed with less effort, but grasping the essence of the material made sense to me as I am trying to get a better idea of how to use econometric tools. Conclusion: it is completely worth your time, but if you are not sufficiently well versed in math and statistics, basic college level, you will need to make a significant time investment to make full use of the material. | Conclusion: it is completely worth your | Time | but if you are not sufficiently | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Very useful course for those who want to learn what is behind econometric tools and what their limitations are. The combination between practice and theory makes it an exciting learning experience that is worth the time investment. For those, like myself, that were not 100% up to speed at the start, a significant time investment is needed. To finish the course I had to spend in excess of 20 hours a week to satisfactorily understand the material and be able to reproduce the main takeaways. I am sure the course can be successfully completed with less effort, but grasping the essence of the material made sense to me as I am trying to get a better idea of how to use econometric tools. Conclusion: it is completely worth your time, but if you are not sufficiently well versed in math and statistics, basic college level, you will need to make a significant time investment to make full use of the material. | will need to make a significant | Time | investment to make full use of | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Good content and exercise, very pedagogic. The only problem are the use of the program: If you don't know how to use a statistical program such as R, you will spend more time struggling with the program than understanding the topic. | as R, you will spend more | Time | struggling with the program than understanding | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 1BM3lirjEeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | One thing I regret from this course is the content of the video lectures. Having watch the first week's videos, I found that the professor mostly just read the slides - and did it in a very faithful and careful manner, not to miss a subscript .... This is quite devastating for me. I can read the slides myself (although I have to download it first, since the fonts on the screen are very small). What I need is the professor to explain the logic behind the formulas, the *why* behind what is written, instead of just reading *what* is written on the slides. I find it amusing that with an expected learning of 8 hours a week, the total duration of the first week's videos add up to a mere 36 minutes. A couple of weeks ago I have just finished a course that subjectively is comparable in its difficulty level. That course is also rich in mathematical content and also requires a commitment of 4-8 hours per week. Each week, the duration of the lecture videos amount to somewhere between 120-150 minutes - and the lecturer didn't read slides; instead, he would explain the logic behind the concepts and provided papers for learners to read on our own time. That approach really helped scaffold my learning. I hope you'd consider revisiting this course's learning plan - or probably just state on the course info page that this course is more suitable for a refresher course rather than an introductory one. | learners to read on our own | Time | That approach really helped scaffold my | Positive | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| 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. | live here. Never mind 2100, the | Time | of change is here, now - | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | A BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT COURSE, the teachers put A LOT of effort into making the lecture slides and videos. Everything was explained multiple times such that the student understands it better. Also, computer vision, especially geometric vision is difficult to understand without a proper background in linear algebra, but the teachers' explanation was enough to fill the gaps so that even someone with only a minimalistic knowledge of linear algebra was able to consume the content. The exercises were a class apart, they were very well structured with tangible results at the end of each, And each of the exercises brought together the key points of the lectures, so that the student could easily implement them in code and test out the algorithm. Last but the not the least, the community was very active with the teaching assistants pitching in wherever necessary, in particular, Stephen did a great job of understanding the issues students were facing and taking appropriate action. All in All, a very well structured course to jump start one's career into computer vision. | and videos. Everything was explained multiple | Time | such that the student understands it | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | This course is great! There is a lot of information available, a wide range of topics are covered, some complex subjects are explained quite well and especially the Chinese professor makes it easy to understand them. Still, there is room for improvement. Considering this is a 4-week course and the coverage of the material, sometimes it feels too squeezed and cramped together. This could be improved by providing access to more references to other materials to complement the studies. A bibliography for instance would be much welcome. Also there are some annoying typos in the slides in the formulas and its derivations that can cost you some precious time to figure out, especially during the Matlab assignments. These are the only reasons I don't give this course 5 stars, but it's definitely worthwhile. You will not regret it! | that can cost you some precious | Time | to figure out, especially during the | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | It is certainly the most comprehensive course in computer vision that can be provided in a span of four weeks. It is much time consuming compared to the other four courses (I have done this at the end); however, each and every bit of it is worth it. The teaching is incredible, especially, Prof. Shi's teaching includes intuition and physical interpretation which helps in appreciating the equations much more. The assignments equally match with the lecture content. Trust me, by the end of four weeks you will be comfortable in reading and understanding papers in visual SLAM, pose estimation, etc. A small suggestion: in a few lectures, for instance in SIFT lecture, Prof. Daniilidis is not shown in the screen whereas his actions are necessary to better understand the content in the slides. The Professors and the TAs have done a commendable job and thank you all for this course. | of four weeks. It is much | Time | consuming compared to the other four | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | As a standalone course - incredible. Lots of content, in detailed guides through maths. You seem to have been structural, but I still go lost every time. Overall impression is very chaotic. Maybe more summaries could help. Also separating videos into 'guide through maths' and ' guide through reasoning/theory/motivation' could help As a part of specialization: This course has more content than the previous 3 courses combined. This took me by surprise and it actually took me 3 months to finish this course. Maybe you could saparate some stuff to optional and required? | but I still go lost every | Time | Overall impression is very chaotic. Maybe | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | A good course have lots of Quizzes and lecture material takes some time thats all. | Quizzes and lecture material takes some | Time | thats all. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | The course is a very good overall description of the Perception field. The part I really liked is that there was no haste or a concept just superficially discussed - lectures are long and detailed. The presentation of lectures especially from Prof. Jianbo Shi are excellent - to represent Matrices in colours and give a intuitive sense of every formula(especially the Jacobians and treating the image blending process as painting) . The bad part of this course is that pronunciations of faculties could be a little unclear and hence a very good transcript is required - which in this course is not upto the mark. There were few mistakes on the slides and should be rectified atleast in the pdf of the slides. What this means is that we have to go through some frustration while watching the video first time which gradually improves on second or third view. Also, there is absolutely no participation of teaching staff. A good content should be supplemented with assistance to further enhance learning experience. Few doubts because of this remains unclear and I wish I could have got this sorted in this class. | frustration while watching the video first | Time | which gradually improves on second or | Positive | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| 1eYewVu-EeWACQpGR_316w | The videos are so long in time and not very clear. | The videos are so long in | Time | and not very clear. | Negative | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Thanks very much. Thanks to this course named Work Smarter, Not Harder I found the way which manages effective time. | found the way which manages effective | Time | | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It is a great opportunity to involve and invest in your knowledge. This course help you up, with an unique and key skill, to be successful in your professional and personal life. Easy to understand and easy to follow, this course worth the effort, money and time spent. | course worth the effort, money and | Time | spent. | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Important concept about time management but I believe it would be more better if it is more detailed | Important concept about | Time | management but I believe it would | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course helped me to lot to manage my time | me to lot to manage my | Time | | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great basics in time management. Even if you are experience in managing your time there are some gold nuggets here to apply to your every day. | Great basics in | Time | management. Even if you are experience | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great basics in time management. Even if you are experience in managing your time there are some gold nuggets here to apply to your every day. | you are experience in managing your | Time | there are some gold nuggets here | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I found the course pretty basic. It did cover the topics well , however, in-depth understanding and newer concepts (for eg. exercises on time quadrants) could have been introduced & explained in detail. | newer concepts (for eg. exercises on | Time | quadrants) could have been introduced & | Negative | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Excellent, quick course to revise Basics of Time Management & Productivity. | quick course to revise Basics of | Time | Management & Productivity. | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I found it helpful overall. It gave me practical tips to use on my work life, and changed some misconceptions I had about things like multitasking and work/life balance. It also teach me with base the importance of having a work plan and measure the activities I do usually and where could I be spending more time than necessary. | where could I be spending more | Time | than necessary. | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | very helpful suggestions on tracking time cost and improving efficiency | very helpful suggestions on tracking | Time | cost and improving efficiency | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked. these methods really drives into good time management | these methods really drives into good | Time | management | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This class provided me with new techniques for me to use to manage my time more efficiently. It gave me a new way at looking at some things and helped me define some new strategies for successful productivity. | me to use to manage my | Time | more efficiently. It gave me a | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great especially when you are time management problems | Great especially when you are | Time | management problems | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I like the course and the topics learned are very practical. This has helped me manage my office time. | has helped me manage my office | Time | | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | An interesting course for everyone who has no idea about time management and professional prductivity. | everyone who has no idea about | Time | management and professional prductivity. | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | its very worthy course for me as it teach me time management. | for me as it teach me | Time | management. | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Simple and effective techniques to improve time management. | Simple and effective techniques to improve | Time | management. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very valuable information. I wish that it was broken up differently, say, that there are six components to time management: planning, scheduling, estimating, adjusting, strategic reserve etc. And then these are different ways you can integrate them. The content is there, but I had to work out that structure myself. | that there are six components to | Time | management: planning, scheduling, estimating, adjusting, strategic | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Short and crisp course with very useful information captured and delivered in a very short time. Captures very useful additional resources. | and delivered in a very short | Time | Captures very useful additional resources. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very easy to understand concepts, really makes you accountable for your time so that you make good work and home life balance easier. | really makes you accountable for your | Time | so that you make good work | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very good course. It was extremely easy for me as I have near-OCD tendencies and am a retired Army veteran. Time management has been one of my biggest practices in the last couple of decades of my life. Everything I've already known to be true was taught in this course. Great blocks of instruction! | and am a retired Army veteran. | Time | management has been one of my | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course had a lot of great tips to make sure that you are making the most of the time you have. I found them useful not only for my professional life but my personal one as well. | are making the most of the | Time | you have. I found them useful | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good tools for time management | Good tools for | Time | management | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This is a short but inspiring course. It raises only a few key points but they are sufficient enough to shock you and encourage you to review your time management and goal setting. | and encourage you to review your | Time | management and goal setting. | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's quite a simple course. What I was impressed was the supplementary reading linked to an online article - you are not doing things by saving time but the time will save itself if you | are not doing things by saving | Time | but the time will save itself | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's quite a simple course. What I was impressed was the supplementary reading linked to an online article - you are not doing things by saving time but the time will save itself if you | things by saving time but the | Time | will save itself if you | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Really good tools for managing your time and useful recommendations :) | Really good tools for managing your | Time | and useful recommendations :) | Negative | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A short course on how to manage your personnal or work time. The course will give you good advice, good practice and good tools. After this course, you will be able to manage your time with more efficiency but you are the only person who can make the real difference :) | to manage your personnal or work | Time | The course will give you good | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A short course on how to manage your personnal or work time. The course will give you good advice, good practice and good tools. After this course, you will be able to manage your time with more efficiency but you are the only person who can make the real difference :) | will be able to manage your | Time | with more efficiency but you are | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Fantastic course to learn to manage your time and not let other people manage you. | course to learn to manage your | Time | and not let other people manage | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Incredible ! Amazing that courses offer. To learn about Time Management | that courses offer. To learn about | Time | Management | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This module covers all the basic and yet very important information to be able to set your goal/priorities right everyday. Planning and making an estimate with the task for the day helps me to identify what I need to do first. Knowing what is multitasking and how to be effective in delivering several task at the same time. Thank you for all additional modules and video. | delivering several task at the same | Time | Thank you for all additional modules | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Quick, easy and to the point! It's time management I already knew but didn't know how to organize it. | easy and to the point! It's | Time | management I already knew but didn't | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very useful suggestions for time management - to the point and effective! You can use the strategies right away. Thank you for this! | Very useful suggestions for | Time | management - to the point and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Excellent course, goes to the point very fast with golden tips for time management improvement. | very fast with golden tips for | Time | management improvement. | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course was quite helpful. In true time management fashion, it was concise , yet presented enough information to spark interest and encourage further reading and research. | course was quite helpful. In true | Time | management fashion, it was concise , | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This was a good time management course. It's fairly basic. But worth taking as a first time | This was a good | Time | management course. It's fairly basic. But | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This was a good time management course. It's fairly basic. But worth taking as a first time | But worth taking as a first | Time | | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It was interesting to learn on how to better manage my time, although was too theoretical. | on how to better manage my | Time | although was too theoretical. | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | great content. learnt about strategic reserve times, and other practical tips. if only I could see my quiz results for free | great content. learnt about strategic reserve | Time | and other practical tips. if only | Positive | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Time management is key in becoming successful and great delivery too | | Time | management is key in becoming successful | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's great course and give advice for effectively managing your time and increasing productivity | give advice for effectively managing your | Time | and increasing productivity | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Owesome course! with a lot of creative ideas and examples for time management | of creative ideas and examples for | Time | management | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good. but this is just kind of manual. We must train ourselves to follow this tips. Every time we got failed that we didn't know how to train us. If you have already tried several times for time management and failed, You would fail because of the same reason. This course will just show what is good and what is bed. We already know. What we need to know is.... How to train us. | ourselves to follow this tips. Every | Time | we got failed that we didn't | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good. but this is just kind of manual. We must train ourselves to follow this tips. Every time we got failed that we didn't know how to train us. If you have already tried several times for time management and failed, You would fail because of the same reason. This course will just show what is good and what is bed. We already know. What we need to know is.... How to train us. | If you have already tried several | Time | for time management and failed, You | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good. but this is just kind of manual. We must train ourselves to follow this tips. Every time we got failed that we didn't know how to train us. If you have already tried several times for time management and failed, You would fail because of the same reason. This course will just show what is good and what is bed. We already know. What we need to know is.... How to train us. | have already tried several times for | Time | management and failed, You would fail | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very useful. Videos are short, so it's easy to complete it and don't require much time. | complete it and don't require much | Time | | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very simple and easy course to understand, with practical and useful tips to improve time management. | practical and useful tips to improve | Time | management. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | this course helped me so much in realizing and organizing my time. | much in realizing and organizing my | Time | | Negative | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | As a new manager, I thought this was agree at refresher course. It brought tools and strategies into focus which have helped me better utilize my time and become more productive. | have helped me better utilize my | Time | and become more productive. | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | instead working harder harder using more time for work, working smarter increases our efficiency ithink those tactics which increases our efficiancy are going teach in this course | instead working harder harder using more | Time | for work, working smarter increases our | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course was very beneficial. Key learning points were, 1) Prioritizing your tasks 2) Estimating the time of our planned activities 3) Focusing on one task at a time. | Prioritizing your tasks 2) Estimating the | Time | of our planned activities 3) Focusing | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course was very beneficial. Key learning points were, 1) Prioritizing your tasks 2) Estimating the time of our planned activities 3) Focusing on one task at a time. | Focusing on one task at a | Time | | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good overview of time management, provided decent introduction to strategies. | Good overview of | Time | management, provided decent introduction to strategies. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Informative light hearted class. Great for those starting their understanding of time management. A follow up course would be a nice segue into deeper time management concepts. Thanks | for those starting their understanding of | Time | management. A follow up course would | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Informative light hearted class. Great for those starting their understanding of time management. A follow up course would be a nice segue into deeper time management concepts. Thanks | be a nice segue into deeper | Time | management concepts. Thanks | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Really useful! You should do it If you are struggling with your time. | If you are struggling with your | Time | | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The topics are all very basic and the audio/video is sub-par, but the course offers a coherent overview of the core topics of time management and several useful tools and resources together with a few pointers to relevant literature on the topic, such as David Allen's GTD. Applying all of the techniques presented in the course is a surefire way to enhance one's own productivity both at work and in the private life. | overview of the core topics of | Time | management and several useful tools and | Positive | 0.72 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I have learned few very efficient strategies to improve my work productivity and balance my work-life time. Really like the concept of supporting ourselves through the change. Highly recommend anyone who wants to improve their time management. | work productivity and balance my work-life | Time | Really like the concept of supporting | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I have learned few very efficient strategies to improve my work productivity and balance my work-life time. Really like the concept of supporting ourselves through the change. Highly recommend anyone who wants to improve their time management. | anyone who wants to improve their | Time | management. | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I use taught methods and could manage time more efficiently. | use taught methods and could manage | Time | more efficiently. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A very helpful course. Short and to the point. It made me consider a lot of my bad habits which resulted in bad time management. I now appreciate my time more and welling to change the way I think, plan and manage my time better than I used to in order to be more productive. I realize that multitasking gave me the illusion of being so accomplished, when the only thing I was accomplishing was being highly distracted and by that working against myself. I loved the additional materials, especially Mike Sanders YouTube videos. Thank you very much for providing this course! | bad habits which resulted in bad | Time | management. I now appreciate my time | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A very helpful course. Short and to the point. It made me consider a lot of my bad habits which resulted in bad time management. I now appreciate my time more and welling to change the way I think, plan and manage my time better than I used to in order to be more productive. I realize that multitasking gave me the illusion of being so accomplished, when the only thing I was accomplishing was being highly distracted and by that working against myself. I loved the additional materials, especially Mike Sanders YouTube videos. Thank you very much for providing this course! | time management. I now appreciate my | Time | more and welling to change the | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A very helpful course. Short and to the point. It made me consider a lot of my bad habits which resulted in bad time management. I now appreciate my time more and welling to change the way I think, plan and manage my time better than I used to in order to be more productive. I realize that multitasking gave me the illusion of being so accomplished, when the only thing I was accomplishing was being highly distracted and by that working against myself. I loved the additional materials, especially Mike Sanders YouTube videos. Thank you very much for providing this course! | I think, plan and manage my | Time | better than I used to in | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good introductory class for time management | Good introductory class for | Time | management | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | simple and useful tips. the lecturer introduced importance and method for time log, prioritization, dealing with different tasks (do immediately, archive, do later, wait for other information), keeping only 1 calendar, etc. also, she introduced the "switching cost" concept and way to decrease it (taking notes before switching task), which is very useful | lecturer introduced importance and method for | Time | log, prioritization, dealing with different tasks | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A fast track course that helps you out to focus on what really matters to avoid wasting your time. | really matters to avoid wasting your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A good basic introduction to the principles of time management in the professional workplace. However, a bit light in terms of depth, and not overly challenging. | basic introduction to the principles of | Time | management in the professional workplace. However, | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A very brief and well explanation of Time Management that is useful for personal and professional productivity. | very brief and well explanation of | Time | Management that is useful for personal | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Really great concise course to structure all your knowledge about time management. Nothing ground-breaking, but still very helpful. | to structure all your knowledge about | Time | management. Nothing ground-breaking, but still very | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Was good on the description and clearly mentioned in each point. Felt like time can be managed somehow. | mentioned in each point. Felt like | Time | can be managed somehow. | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I needed to listen this productivity hints in a organized form. If you have any problems with time management I recommend this course. | If you have any problems with | Time | management I recommend this course. | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good Course! Great introduction about time management tools, tips, and best practices. Could be better with more realistic examples. | Good Course! Great introduction about | Time | management tools, tips, and best practices. | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Learnt many things. Now I have a very different view on priorities and utilisation of time. | view on priorities and utilisation of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good simple information and tools that will help you in starting the long course of time management. Good instructor elaborating with multiple examples. | in starting the long course of | Time | management. Good instructor elaborating with multiple | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course is very clear and in a simple language explains and describes best tools to improve time management. | and describes best tools to improve | Time | management. | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A little bit tedious/monotonous course. It has some useful tips and tests for beginners in Personal Time Managment. | and tests for beginners in Personal | Time | Managment. | Positive | 0.68 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I do not recommend you to waste your time. Planned course activities for a week - just 13 minute speech of the lecturer, telling absolutely banal things and a few questions. Absolutely useless. | not recommend you to waste your | Time | Planned course activities for a week | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I'm happy about this course bocause of time needed to complete it and because of it's self-sufficiency. | happy about this course bocause of | Time | needed to complete it and because | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good course, but a bit simple if you have any previous experience with or interest in managing your own time. | or interest in managing your own | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very good tools to use for time management. My favorite lesson is where the facilitator stated we teach people how to treat us i.e. answering emails at 2am. It can wait. | Very good tools to use for | Time | management. My favorite lesson is where | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | An interesting course for all those who does n`t know where they are lacking in of being productive..where they miss the train when they are always run along with it As i previously talking some of time management work shops and knowing about 4 quadrants of time i am excited for this course :) | As i previously talking some of | Time | management work shops and knowing about | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | An interesting course for all those who does n`t know where they are lacking in of being productive..where they miss the train when they are always run along with it As i previously talking some of time management work shops and knowing about 4 quadrants of time i am excited for this course :) | and knowing about 4 quadrants of | Time | i am excited for this course | Positive | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very simple steps to start managing our time at womore efficiently | simple steps to start managing our | Time | at womore efficiently | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good tips and techniques to better manage your time and priorities. | and techniques to better manage your | Time | and priorities. | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A great course that introduces techniques to have a better grip on once time. The techniques are simple, intuitive and most of all practical with immediate results. | have a better grip on once | Time | The techniques are simple, intuitive and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | A great course and a brilliant teacher. Covers a wide but relevant set of topics and acts as a practical guide for managing time and working smarter. Thank you. | as a practical guide for managing | Time | and working smarter. Thank you. | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Excellent course with great ideas for time management. Key element is to have a plan. | Excellent course with great ideas for | Time | management. Key element is to have | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | i like it. simply and clear about time management and productivity. thanks! | like it. simply and clear about | Time | management and productivity. thanks! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It is an honest helpful tool to start to work around one inability to manage time. | work around one inability to manage | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Awesome course, its shown me way to progress with much needed changes in managing both my work and personal time. | managing both my work and personal | Time | | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | thanks , this course help me to review some known age about time management.I really want work more smarter,. | to review some known age about | Time | management. I really want work more | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course consists of many beneficial suggestions. If you apply them in your life, most probably you'll allocate your time more efficiently and more purposefully. | life, most probably you'll allocate your | Time | more efficiently and more purposefully. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked that the lecturer is not wasting my time but also takes pauses: that's a great balance! I liked that the course is short (it took me two days to complete it). Information is relevant and worth thinking about. Especially for those people who haven't been thinking about it before. I would improve design components of the course: typography of letters and all writings. It would make a course much much better. It could be done easily for the person who is familiar with this, but would make the course much much better for another people. Thanks, Margaret Meloni and her team! | the lecturer is not wasting my | Time | but also takes pauses: that's a | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very helpful ideas and a short time commitment. | Very helpful ideas and a short | Time | commitment. | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | For those whose duties vary from day-to-day and week-to-week, given a performance objective to improve one's time management seems to be impossible given the lectures. I'm in the middle of the course but hopefully I will see this variation discussed. | a performance objective to improve one's | Time | management seems to be impossible given | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very good, I learn a lot about time management | good, I learn a lot about | Time | management | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | gave us many skills to save our time | us many skills to save our | Time | | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very informative, very clear intrustion on how to improve my time consume efficiency | intrustion on how to improve my | Time | consume efficiency | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Pretty basic stuff, but still good suggestions for new people in the field of time management and prioritization. | new people in the field of | Time | management and prioritization. | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | save more time and work easier than ever. | save more | Time | and work easier than ever. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Basics of time management but still interesting. | Basics of | Time | management but still interesting. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Basic information provided. Very interesting material on the last module. This course is for someone that has never taken a time management course. | someone that has never taken a | Time | management course. | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Helped me get a grip on time at work.... | Helped me get a grip on | Time | at work. . . . | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The essential and completely knowledge neccessary to managing my time. Thank you very much. | completely knowledge neccessary to managing my | Time | Thank you very much. | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great Course. Teach how to manage task and time. I will apply the concepts learning in this course. | Teach how to manage task and | Time | I will apply the concepts learning | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is very good for me. I find out many ways to save up my time and money. Thank you for providing such an interesting and helpful course. | many ways to save up my | Time | and money. Thank you for providing | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course has lot of things I use to ponder about but never concluded. It give some convincing approaches and some cool tips. Motivated me again to manage my time. Thanks you team for this amazing course. | Motivated me again to manage my | Time | Thanks you team for this amazing | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Clearly and easy to apply this to my work and life time. | this to my work and life | Time | | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very comprehensive training on time management and effectiveness A big thank you to the teacher ! She is calm, convincing and the course is well organized | Very comprehensive training on | Time | management and effectiveness A big thank | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It helps a lot to manage my time and how to make me more productivity. | helps a lot to manage my | Time | and how to make me more | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is for newbee only. If you already spent some time on topics like time-management or personal effectiveness you probably won't get a lot of new knowledge in this course. But for the beginners it is ok. | only. If you already spent some | Time | on topics like time-management or personal | Negative | 0.91 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is less informative and systematic than I expected. Although some time management tools are provided, the course is in general loose rather practical. | systematic than I expected. Although some | Time | management tools are provided, the course | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is subtitle for all professionals regardless their field of specialisation. Along with health, time is the most precious thing in our lives. | field of specialisation. Along with health, | Time | is the most precious thing in | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great tips of Time managment | Great tips of | Time | managment | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very practical tips for managing your time and being in control of your workflow versus it controlling you. | Very practical tips for managing your | Time | and being in control of your | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | it was a good course which helped me track and manage my time | helped me track and manage my | Time | | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very short but very informative. give all the necessary tools to manage your time. I've already stusted inplementing it! | the necessary tools to manage your | Time | I've already stusted inplementing it! | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Really good short intro to the time management. | Really good short intro to the | Time | management. | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | These thoughts aren't new, but they helped me collect my own. I mean how can i improve my work and at the same time do not spend more time for that. | my work and at the same | Time | do not spend more time for | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | These thoughts aren't new, but they helped me collect my own. I mean how can i improve my work and at the same time do not spend more time for that. | same time do not spend more | Time | for that. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Worth the time to learn new things or reenforce good habits | Worth the | Time | to learn new things or reenforce | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course give a brief overview of Time Management in simple manner. One needs to practice and create habits however to make use of the course | course give a brief overview of | Time | Management in simple manner. One needs | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course offers practical suggestions on time management and productivity. It has helped me to focus on work and meet my professional goals. | The course offers practical suggestions on | Time | management and productivity. It has helped | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course provide many useful methods to make you aware of your time, after that you can use your time more effectively. | to make you aware of your | Time | after that you can use your | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course provide many useful methods to make you aware of your time, after that you can use your time more effectively. | after that you can use your | Time | more effectively. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | good enough for saving and managing my time | enough for saving and managing my | Time | | Negative | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very neat and nice lecture. It is very good to control and save time and also this lecture itself is well designed to do time managing. | very good to control and save | Time | and also this lecture itself is | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very neat and nice lecture. It is very good to control and save time and also this lecture itself is well designed to do time managing. | itself is well designed to do | Time | managing. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I can't manage time but I can manage task. | I can't manage | Time | but I can manage task. | Negative | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course does not offer very useful material. The instructor speaks too slowly and it takes her a long time to explain simple ideas. | and it takes her a long | Time | to explain simple ideas. | Positive | 0.75 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | it's a good course and I find it very inspiring. If the teacher can outline more specific examples about time management would be more wonderful. | can outline more specific examples about | Time | management would be more wonderful. | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It is a good course that gives you a general idea about how to manage your time. | idea about how to manage your | Time | | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is very helpful for me to live an organized life.I understood how I was wasting a lot of time and this course is helping me to do more and more towards my professional and personal development and let me plan things smarter and made me avoid unnecessary stress or tension.Thank You! | I was wasting a lot of | Time | and this course is helping me | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's a good course and has helped me understand time management better than the motivational books ever did. | course and has helped me understand | Time | management better than the motivational books | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It is a great course! Condense and precise with a quick and easy to apply techniques to improve our time management. I highly recommend! | to apply techniques to improve our | Time | management. I highly recommend! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked this course a lot because it has helped me to realise that I can plan my day better than I did, how to keep track of how I spend my time, to keep in mind productive vs unproductive work and much more. | track of how I spend my | Time | to keep in mind productive vs | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | what is good about the course is that it is a small course in time and to the point, hope to learn more | it is a small course in | Time | and to the point, hope to | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | short and sweet and right down to the point, this course offers very basic techniques for being efficient in the workplace. nothing revolutionary, but very basic stuff that truly works. It does not take much time and effort to go through the course and immediately apply what you learn. I have been in the professional life for 4 decades now, but I still learned a few tricks that helped me get more transparency in how I spend my time. highly recommended. | works. It does not take much | Time | and effort to go through the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | short and sweet and right down to the point, this course offers very basic techniques for being efficient in the workplace. nothing revolutionary, but very basic stuff that truly works. It does not take much time and effort to go through the course and immediately apply what you learn. I have been in the professional life for 4 decades now, but I still learned a few tricks that helped me get more transparency in how I spend my time. highly recommended. | transparency in how I spend my | Time | highly recommended. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Simple and practical guidelines which can be followed easily. I think I will be able to apply the methods discussed in the course on daily basis without actually spending much time on learning them as they are very practical! The course has been useful in making me realize where all my time has been going without quantifiable results and hopefully I will be able to make a habit of good time management. Thank you for putting it together :-) | daily basis without actually spending much | Time | on learning them as they are | Negative | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Simple and practical guidelines which can be followed easily. I think I will be able to apply the methods discussed in the course on daily basis without actually spending much time on learning them as they are very practical! The course has been useful in making me realize where all my time has been going without quantifiable results and hopefully I will be able to make a habit of good time management. Thank you for putting it together :-) | making me realize where all my | Time | has been going without quantifiable results | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Simple and practical guidelines which can be followed easily. I think I will be able to apply the methods discussed in the course on daily basis without actually spending much time on learning them as they are very practical! The course has been useful in making me realize where all my time has been going without quantifiable results and hopefully I will be able to make a habit of good time management. Thank you for putting it together :-) | to make a habit of good | Time | management. Thank you for putting it | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very nice course. Learnt some important things regarding time management. | course. Learnt some important things regarding | Time | management. | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | i think it is very important to learn how to manage your time, I loved the topics and the teaching was just great, thanks so much | to learn how to manage your | Time | I loved the topics and the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The teacher seems really nice and explains things really clearly, however the content of this course is not as helpful as I believed. It gave me a few new techniques to better administrate my time, but nothing that will revolutionize the way I work. | new techniques to better administrate my | Time | but nothing that will revolutionize the | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I'm in business and this is one of the course I really appreciate! I think I will not only save time but money aswell :) | think I will not only save | Time | but money aswell :) | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great! It help me make my time clearly to control | Great! It help me make my | Time | clearly to control | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Love this course. Nice presentations and video lectures. Would love to see more reference materials in future. Thanks to the team, which helped me to realize where i stand, and where to focus in "time management and professional productivity". | and where to focus in " | Time | management and professional productivity" . | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Full of great information on how to balance work time. | information on how to balance work | Time | | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | the most important information about time and task mangement. But it should be more deep and more articles and books should be recommanded. | the most important information about | Time | and task mangement. But it should | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 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. | the multitasking part. have habits of | Time | management, though didn't know how to | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course offers very useful tools and topics that would lead you to improve your time management and at the same time introduce you to a more productive work environment. It is a bit short and I think that it could go deeper on its content, offering other tools in time tracking and visualization. I definitely recommend this course. | would lead you to improve your | Time | management and at the same time | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course offers very useful tools and topics that would lead you to improve your time management and at the same time introduce you to a more productive work environment. It is a bit short and I think that it could go deeper on its content, offering other tools in time tracking and visualization. I definitely recommend this course. | time management and at the same | Time | introduce you to a more productive | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course offers very useful tools and topics that would lead you to improve your time management and at the same time introduce you to a more productive work environment. It is a bit short and I think that it could go deeper on its content, offering other tools in time tracking and visualization. I definitely recommend this course. | its content, offering other tools in | Time | tracking and visualization. I definitely recommend | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This was very helpful and let me know better track and account for my time, including better prioritization. | better track and account for my | Time | including better prioritization. | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Gives useful techniques for developing solid skills and setting reasonable goals for usage of time available. I'm glad I took the time to complete this course. | setting reasonable goals for usage of | Time | available. I'm glad I took the | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Gives useful techniques for developing solid skills and setting reasonable goals for usage of time available. I'm glad I took the time to complete this course. | available. I'm glad I took the | Time | to complete this course. | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Some things are useful, such as the table "task list", but I would say there isn't enough of this type of help. It would be better if there were more tables like that. Also, more information and help is needed on how to accomplish multitasking. Unfortunately, multitasking is necessary in many environments, from office to home, and even a housewife has to multitask. One of the most important aspects of multitasking that was not covered and that is really needed is how to multitask in a situation of "housewife" type of work. Examples of this include engineering, molecular biology, chemistry, work in a lab in general etc. You constantly need, like a housewife, put something for a chemical reaction (or start laundry, or put a cake in the oven), and then you have to wait for the chemical reaction to occur. And during that time when you wait, you need to keep this ongoing "laundry" task in your head, so that you don't forget to take it out later on time. And when there are more than 3-4 tasks like that, and they all have this "pick me up and start on me later" thing, they are all in your head and they take up all your memory and resources. And the worst part is, it's difficult to schedule them, because you need to schedule not how long will something take, not in a linear fashion, but how long will multiple parallel things take. I would really appreciate it if there was something about this topic in a time management course. | reaction to occur. And during that | Time | when you wait, you need to | Positive | 0.73 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Some things are useful, such as the table "task list", but I would say there isn't enough of this type of help. It would be better if there were more tables like that. Also, more information and help is needed on how to accomplish multitasking. Unfortunately, multitasking is necessary in many environments, from office to home, and even a housewife has to multitask. One of the most important aspects of multitasking that was not covered and that is really needed is how to multitask in a situation of "housewife" type of work. Examples of this include engineering, molecular biology, chemistry, work in a lab in general etc. You constantly need, like a housewife, put something for a chemical reaction (or start laundry, or put a cake in the oven), and then you have to wait for the chemical reaction to occur. And during that time when you wait, you need to keep this ongoing "laundry" task in your head, so that you don't forget to take it out later on time. And when there are more than 3-4 tasks like that, and they all have this "pick me up and start on me later" thing, they are all in your head and they take up all your memory and resources. And the worst part is, it's difficult to schedule them, because you need to schedule not how long will something take, not in a linear fashion, but how long will multiple parallel things take. I would really appreciate it if there was something about this topic in a time management course. | to take it out later on | Time | And when there are more than | Positive | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Some things are useful, such as the table "task list", but I would say there isn't enough of this type of help. It would be better if there were more tables like that. Also, more information and help is needed on how to accomplish multitasking. Unfortunately, multitasking is necessary in many environments, from office to home, and even a housewife has to multitask. One of the most important aspects of multitasking that was not covered and that is really needed is how to multitask in a situation of "housewife" type of work. Examples of this include engineering, molecular biology, chemistry, work in a lab in general etc. You constantly need, like a housewife, put something for a chemical reaction (or start laundry, or put a cake in the oven), and then you have to wait for the chemical reaction to occur. And during that time when you wait, you need to keep this ongoing "laundry" task in your head, so that you don't forget to take it out later on time. And when there are more than 3-4 tasks like that, and they all have this "pick me up and start on me later" thing, they are all in your head and they take up all your memory and resources. And the worst part is, it's difficult to schedule them, because you need to schedule not how long will something take, not in a linear fashion, but how long will multiple parallel things take. I would really appreciate it if there was something about this topic in a time management course. | something about this topic in a | Time | management course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good practical and useful tips. In my opinion, the topics are covered with the right detail within the right time. Thank you! | the right detail within the right | Time | Thank you! | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Some practical time management tips. I found the parts on how to sort email and how to buffer crisis time especially useful. | Some practical | Time | management tips. I found the parts | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Some practical time management tips. I found the parts on how to sort email and how to buffer crisis time especially useful. | email and how to buffer crisis | Time | especially useful. | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Excellent course! It really helped me to organize my time not only at work but at home for my chores and side projects! | really helped me to organize my | Time | not only at work but at | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's alright, but could be much much better. I didn't feel engaged and half of the time I was just wishing the video would just end. The course itself highlighted some good ideas about saving time and prioritising, but the way it was presented just fell short for me. | feel engaged and half of the | Time | I was just wishing the video | Negative | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It's alright, but could be much much better. I didn't feel engaged and half of the time I was just wishing the video would just end. The course itself highlighted some good ideas about saving time and prioritising, but the way it was presented just fell short for me. | highlighted some good ideas about saving | Time | and prioritising, but the way it | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course is short but contains a lot of things. It helps me to track my time and review what has been done in a day, week, month and year. By studying these statistics I could re-arrange my time of doing things, prioritizing myself and discipline myself. Thanks a lot for this course. | It helps me to track my | Time | and review what has been done | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | The course is short but contains a lot of things. It helps me to track my time and review what has been done in a day, week, month and year. By studying these statistics I could re-arrange my time of doing things, prioritizing myself and discipline myself. Thanks a lot for this course. | these statistics I could re-arrange my | Time | of doing things, prioritizing myself and | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | This course is very useful and meaningful which helped in saving my time and improved my efficiency | meaningful which helped in saving my | Time | and improved my efficiency | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It covers very basic concepts of time management. | It covers very basic concepts of | Time | management. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very nice tricks and insight to better manage your time and getting things done. Good course, achievable and worth the time spent. Thanks, Massimiliano | and insight to better manage your | Time | and getting things done. Good course, | Negative | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Very nice tricks and insight to better manage your time and getting things done. Good course, achievable and worth the time spent. Thanks, Massimiliano | Good course, achievable and worth the | Time | spent. Thanks, Massimiliano | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Great course on understanding and managing time. | Great course on understanding and managing | Time | | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | It is definitely beneficial to a certain extent but I thought that it was a little dry. However I really enjoyed the time period of each video, as I am the kind of people that tends to get a restless when the teaching gets too long | dry. However I really enjoyed the | Time | period of each video, as I | Positive | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | great introduction to time management | great introduction to | Time | management | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | excellent course and will make you look to your time differently. | will make you look to your | Time | differently. | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Great videos and testing structure. Great feedback to all of my questions in the forums too. 7 hours a week seems about right for me, with the recommended reading and watching the videos. However the course got continually harder and harder and by the time I was at the final exam I was really worried. In the end it got a bit difficult and stressful but I do feel it was valuable, and like I said, getting the feedback, even on weekends in the forums, helped a lot. | harder and harder and by the | Time | I was at the final exam | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This course is highly rigorous and requires you to put in hard work and time. It is a perfect course to build foundations. | to put in hard work and | Time | It is a perfect course to | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This course is definitly suitable for learners who don't have any related background. Dr. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel has an amiable speaking style and always highlighted the key points in teaching videos, which helped me understand other contents in the textbook. Besides, the time and assignment arrangement of this course are also very reasonable. The only thing I could complain about is a system bug of the Amazon AWS and the grading system. My final project file went blank after the system told me the file uploading is sucessfully completed on August 3, and I got three 0 point from three peers since they only saw a blank file, of which I had no idea, and all I could see is "Grading in progress" on the system. Until the final grading day is over, which is August 12, the system finally reminded me of this horrible thing. I came to mentors, disscussion forum as well as the help center, reuploaded my file, desperately tried to find peers who can still spare some time to review my file, and it is finally fixed today. I got my certificate in the end, but the grading process is really frustrating. Hope this bug won't happen to anyone ever ag | contents in the textbook. Besides, the | Time | and assignment arrangement of this course | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This course is definitly suitable for learners who don't have any related background. Dr. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel has an amiable speaking style and always highlighted the key points in teaching videos, which helped me understand other contents in the textbook. Besides, the time and assignment arrangement of this course are also very reasonable. The only thing I could complain about is a system bug of the Amazon AWS and the grading system. My final project file went blank after the system told me the file uploading is sucessfully completed on August 3, and I got three 0 point from three peers since they only saw a blank file, of which I had no idea, and all I could see is "Grading in progress" on the system. Until the final grading day is over, which is August 12, the system finally reminded me of this horrible thing. I came to mentors, disscussion forum as well as the help center, reuploaded my file, desperately tried to find peers who can still spare some time to review my file, and it is finally fixed today. I got my certificate in the end, but the grading process is really frustrating. Hope this bug won't happen to anyone ever ag | peers who can still spare some | Time | to review my file, and it | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Professor Rundel makes the subject interesting by quoting real time examples in the videos. This course will certainly help beginners in statistics. The entire specialization is a step by step process to master statistics. | the subject interesting by quoting real | Time | examples in the videos. This course | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This course was excellent, the teaching material top-notch and with excellent pedagogy. It's amazing that the course authors offer a statistics textbook almost exactly covering the course content for free. The idea to combine R and statistics is right on the money too, thanks to this one can learn 2 skills at the same time, with statistical analysis letting you practice coding in R and R helping you visualise your statistics. The lectures are divided into small, easy to absorb chunks and the teacher does an excellent job explaining the material, giving very good examples and analogies to help the students understand concepts. The exercises and assignments are fun to complete, and the course offers a flexibility in how much time you spend on it per week, e.g. there are non-mandatory exercises to do. | learn 2 skills at the same | Time | with statistical analysis letting you practice | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This course was excellent, the teaching material top-notch and with excellent pedagogy. It's amazing that the course authors offer a statistics textbook almost exactly covering the course content for free. The idea to combine R and statistics is right on the money too, thanks to this one can learn 2 skills at the same time, with statistical analysis letting you practice coding in R and R helping you visualise your statistics. The lectures are divided into small, easy to absorb chunks and the teacher does an excellent job explaining the material, giving very good examples and analogies to help the students understand concepts. The exercises and assignments are fun to complete, and the course offers a flexibility in how much time you spend on it per week, e.g. there are non-mandatory exercises to do. | offers a flexibility in how much | Time | you spend on it per week, | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Amazing course. Learnt a lot in short period of time by taking this course. | a lot in short period of | Time | by taking this course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Course covers a lot of material very efficiently. Instruction is concise, and provides a free online textbook for deeper learning on topics in case you don't fully understand them from the lecture. Be aware that the final project is a serious chunk of work, maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of the total time it took me to complete this course! | 1/3 to 1/2 of the total | Time | it took me to complete this | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | thanks for your effort to make videos, but this is the first time find a class that i can not submit my answer to check if it is correct or not before my account is upgraded. Disappoint to Coursera and Duke. | videos, but this is the first | Time | find a class that i can | Positive | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Very good pace, sets you on a path to creating your own basic games using Unity in no time and also brushes upon scripting with C# which can make your games x times more interesting! | basic games using Unity in no | Time | and also brushes upon scripting with | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Very good pace, sets you on a path to creating your own basic games using Unity in no time and also brushes upon scripting with C# which can make your games x times more interesting! | which can make your games x | Time | more interesting! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Recommended even if you have some experience with Unity. I have a Computer Science degree and worked as a professional game developer on released iOS and Android Unity games, and even though the material was a breeze, I still learned from it. Fits the description as a good introduction. The code week kind of throws beginners into the deep end a bit (lots of material just sort of thrown at you, but they warn you about the ramp up requirements). Good idea to invest time in some beginning programming resources before you dive into the week 4 material. What are you waiting for? Enroll! | up requirements). Good idea to invest | Time | in some beginning programming resources before | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Some given assets need to be upgrades or provided for the latest version of Unity. Otherwise a great class well worth the time and effort. | a great class well worth the | Time | and effort. | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I tried other complex Unity3d courses online, and this one beats them all in the way it is built stage by stage. It doesn't pile too much information from the start, and lets you use pre-generated complex assests first, and only later explains them gradually. Even though I had some basic tutorial in Unity3d I couldn't imagine getting that far within a month, investing only about 3-4 hours on the lectures. The projects themselves consume as much time as you want/have to put into, with at least 3-4 hours on average, but if you want to really learn and improve your skill, it requires a lot more than that. | The projects themselves consume as much | Time | as you want/have to put into, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | For the price, I felt like I learnt a lot, and the way the learning was structured helped me learn quickly and efficiently. At the end of each week I was happy surprised how much work could be created in such a short time! | be created in such a short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | It's a simple and straight-forward course that brings you through the basics pretty fast. If you have the time, you could actually do the whole course in a day or two, just coming back for peer review. There are no surprises and the projects are simple. The instructor even lists what the objects of each lesson and video are, so if you need to look back at a specific feature, you need only look at the titles and then watch that one video. It's also interesting to see what people think of when creating a second level, if they try to go further. | pretty fast. If you have the | Time | you could actually do the whole | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | We really need more coding on this one, perhaps half the time should be dedicated to actual coding. From creating environment grappling- hooks. As well as showing 2D gaming and how to work with Physics. The UI and the Unity Walkthrough on everything from Objects to Particles and animation was really well done. And the Tutor is very good at describing the differences between things, as well as alternating how to create things. | on this one, perhaps half the | Time | should be dedicated to actual coding. | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | The course was really enjoyable, I learned a great deal about game development and Unity 3D in general. I loved the practical approach and getting to know the ins and outs of Unity a lot better. The very last project was the only part I didn't learn as much from. Where going through the code wasn't really helpful - as it's so complicated to someone like me who is very new to C# and coding in general, but I understand it would take too much time to go in depth and that isn't really what the course is about. Otherwise I had a fantastic experience and would definitely like to continue my learning with more courses similar to this! Thanks! | understand it would take too much | Time | to go in depth and that | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Great for an introduction and learning unity basics with a good balance in terms of task time and outcome | good balance in terms of task | Time | and outcome | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | This is the best course i had ever done. I learned many concepts in a very short time. Thank you... | many concepts in a very short | Time | Thank you. . . | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Outstanding. I'd never thought I'd be able to produce some results in such short time. This course opened my eyes on many things. I'll love explore Unity 3D | produce some results in such short | Time | This course opened my eyes on | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | The first course in this Specialization was very fulfilling and I've learned a lot in a short time, even though I had quite a bit of prior knowledge on some topics. The assignments were fitting and realistic, the instructor sympathic and the course was overall great. | learned a lot in a short | Time | even though I had quite a | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Amazing time learning this course. It is hard fun indeed. | Amazing | Time | learning this course. It is hard | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | While I enjoyed the projects and found the instructor easy to follow and understand, I was disappointed in how little coding we did. The code walkthroughs were rushed and I barely learned enough to scratch the surface of some of the scripts we used in the basic projects. Since scripting is such a huge part of game development, I feel like there should have been more focus on it. Maybe a new term in each video or something? And I understand that the course was only four weeks, which doesn't allow much time for deep scripting analysis, but maybe the course should be longer than four weeks. Overall a fun class and I now have two games to show off to people. | four weeks, which doesn't allow much | Time | for deep scripting analysis, but maybe | Negative | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I loved the course through every single lecture and assignment. I think the projects we worked on were a perfect introduction for people who had never worked in Unity before, and for an experienced Unity user (like me) they were a great way to touch up on the basics and even learn a few new ways to organize projects. I'd take this course again a thousand times over, and recommend it for anyone interested in getting into the game development industry, programmer or otherwise. | take this course again a thousand | Time | over, and recommend it for anyone | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | This course is great! I wish that we'd spent a little more time working on scripting, but otherwise I have no complaints! Great introduction to using Unity. | that we'd spent a little more | Time | working on scripting, but otherwise I | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | followed instructions to download twice waste of time both times still kept getting an error never got past this to continue with the course so didn't learn anything other than there is little support out there to resolve the problem i think because the course is not monitored or if it is well then more fool me! it would have been a good opportunity to explore this had it been possible to download Unity oh well those who can do those who can't resume their day to day life packing boxes. | instructions to download twice waste of | Time | both times still kept getting an | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | followed instructions to download twice waste of time both times still kept getting an error never got past this to continue with the course so didn't learn anything other than there is little support out there to resolve the problem i think because the course is not monitored or if it is well then more fool me! it would have been a good opportunity to explore this had it been possible to download Unity oh well those who can do those who can't resume their day to day life packing boxes. | download twice waste of time both | Time | still kept getting an error never | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I enjoyed the course. Very fun playing with the Unity editor, and the assignments give you some freedom in how you tackle assignments. The class was fairly easy and doesn't need much time commitment. | fairly easy and doesn't need much | Time | commitment. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | The instructor videos were clear and informative. The course had a balanced mix of game development theory and practical exercises. Solid introduction to the Unity game design platform. The projects increased in difficulty and time commitment as the course progressed, building on prior knowledge. The peer review of game files was challenging at times, but it was a good experience to create actual games. | The projects increased in difficulty and | Time | commitment as the course progressed, building | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | The instructor videos were clear and informative. The course had a balanced mix of game development theory and practical exercises. Solid introduction to the Unity game design platform. The projects increased in difficulty and time commitment as the course progressed, building on prior knowledge. The peer review of game files was challenging at times, but it was a good experience to create actual games. | of game files was challenging at | Time | but it was a good experience | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Amazing course, this is the first time that so much essential information about learning is accessible in a such well organized matter. It was exciting to learn about the process and the organic materials in the brain when effective and non-effective learing process is take place. I believe that this course can really help me to managie further learning processes on a daily basis. Thanks, Shai | Amazing course, this is the first | Time | that so much essential information about | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | An excellent course which requires hands-on work and well worth the time investment. | hands-on work and well worth the | Time | investment. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | This course is very good at explaining both how and why you would do things a certain way in Unity, something that is missing from most of the tutorials you can find out on the Internet. The professor explains concepts behind why you need to use certain components instead of just giving a list of things to match up to replicate the projects. I've rated it 4 out of 5 stars not based on the content, but because the response time, interaction, and feedback could be improved upon. The content is definitely 5 of 5. I took this during the first run of the course, so I'm sure that the course staff will improve on this in the future once they get a bit more used to running a MOOC on Coursera. | the content, but because the response | Time | interaction, and feedback could be improved | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Pretty good, just wish it had more time to focus more on programming for this free portion of it. | good, just wish it had more | Time | to focus more on programming for | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Excellent Introduction. And Prof Winn is SO right. Creating games is hard fun. With this course, you learn much in a short time and come away with a more-than-passing familiarity with both basic game mechanics and Unity3D -- as well as a little C# coding. It IS hard (for a beginner) but it IS fun!! Thank you. | you learn much in a short | Time | and come away with a more-than-passing | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Loved the course, although it could have been a couple of weeks longer to provider longer time to absorb the more complex material. Many thanks to Brian Winn for making it hard fun to learn! | of weeks longer to provider longer | Time | to absorb the more complex material. | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | Thank you so much for this amazing course! It is very challenging, but at the same time very interesting! I like it also because the material is structured and the explanations are very clear even for the person who never had experience with the backend languages. | very challenging, but at the same | Time | very interesting! I like it also | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 2H8ExCTIEeWeDBJG1XrG0w | I really liked this course. Although some of it depended too much on pre-made scripts it was at the level of games that make sense to a beginner without being to complex (like all of Unity's own tutorials are). Sometimes, it went to fast and I was quickly switching from Unity to Coursera to hit the "pause" button to give me time to catch up. I thought that it took way to long to download other participants work in order to evaluate it, but I think that is an issue with Coursera and not with this course. | " pause" button to give me | Time | to catch up. I thought that | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 2InHZhR3EeW_mxLPrCkAqw | complier error all the time!!!!!! | complier error all the | Time | ! ! ! ! ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 2InHZhR3EeW_mxLPrCkAqw | The teacher explains concepts very well. Really worth the time to go over the lectures several times. The programming assignments however lack instructions and the online judgement system has some strange requests which are not illustrated in the instruction. You have to guess what the assignment is about each time. Overall very good lectures but poor assignments. | concepts very well. Really worth the | Time | to go over the lectures several | Positive | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| 2InHZhR3EeW_mxLPrCkAqw | The teacher explains concepts very well. Really worth the time to go over the lectures several times. The programming assignments however lack instructions and the online judgement system has some strange requests which are not illustrated in the instruction. You have to guess what the assignment is about each time. Overall very good lectures but poor assignments. | to go over the lectures several | Time | The programming assignments however lack instructions | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 2InHZhR3EeW_mxLPrCkAqw | The teacher explains concepts very well. Really worth the time to go over the lectures several times. The programming assignments however lack instructions and the online judgement system has some strange requests which are not illustrated in the instruction. You have to guess what the assignment is about each time. Overall very good lectures but poor assignments. | what the assignment is about each | Time | Overall very good lectures but poor | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | This course is engaging, highly informative, fun, and just the right amount of challenge. Each section (History, Technology, and Security) is taught one at a time. There is a lot of ground covered without it becoming overwhelming. The extra videos available to watch give you more of a background of the history of the internet. Given the important role that the Internet and computers play in our everyday lives, having this background knowledge and basic understanding of how things work is vital. Dr. Chuck is clearly enthusiastic about the subject matter, and it shows. | Security) is taught one at a | Time | There is a lot of ground | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Was very, very usefull and totally worth the time, energy to watch the videos, do the quizes. Dr. Chuck is a really great person, easy to understand. Recommend this class for everybody whose a little interested in the making of the biggest innovation in the 20th century. | very usefull and totally worth the | Time | energy to watch the videos, do | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Learnt a lot of stuff and had a great time! thank you Dr.Chuck | of stuff and had a great | Time | thank you Dr. Chuck | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Thank you sir for taking the time to interview all these amazing people. | Thank you sir for taking the | Time | to interview all these amazing people. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | A fun journey through the history and structure of the internet. This is a thorough but brief introduction. Well worth your time to check out if you're interested in history, technology, programming or just finding out something new. The diversity of interviews is impressive, although there is overlap with Dr. Chuck's other courses. | but brief introduction. Well worth your | Time | to check out if you're interested | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Dr. Chuck was awesome. I found the course very informative and definitely entertaining at times. 5 stars | very informative and definitely entertaining at | Time | 5 stars | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | I am an English language professor. I took this course for "fun"--my BA minor was in history and I am a curious person. I love this course and Dr. Chuck! The way he explains things is "IN ENGLISH!!" I mean that the way he explains things makes sense to a non-literate IT person. In addition, the content is both interesting and informative. The structure of the course is easy to follow. I have taken a few courses where I was not sure what I was supposed to do next, but not in this course. Frankly, I prefer a course where I take quizzes. Projects can be educational and interesting and sometimes necessary to the course content, but I am working 40 to 60 hours a week and don't always have time for courses with projects--and those are the courses I have not completed. I liked just taking quizzes about the content. So far, this has been the best course I have taken in Coursera. And I have already signed up for a second course with Dr. Chuck and the University of Michigan. | a week and don't always have | Time | for courses with projects--and those are | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Really enjoyable and makes you appreciate how far we have come in such a short time. | have come in such a short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Thank you for the course. Very informative. It was the first time I finished the course. | Very informative. It was the first | Time | I finished the course. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Videos are poorly edited (too much blank space, the bullet points are not clearly visible, there is no narrative or discursive structure, the diagrams are not clear, and the interviews are raw and unedited). Sessions are too long and include too much irrelevant information. The little useful information there is, is not structured clearly and thus it's harder to learn. The material for the first 3 weeks resemble more to someone talking about "the good ol' days" rather than a properly thought-out history class. I had to leave the course as I found it to be a waste of my time, and I am glad I decided not to pay for a certificate for it. My expectations were a lot higher for a University course. | to be a waste of my | Time | and I am glad I decided | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | Excellent course, good level and well tutored. Worth the time and effort. | level and well tutored. Worth the | Time | and effort. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | I learned a lot about *how* the internet works, which makes this course totally worth the time I spent on it. | makes this course totally worth the | Time | I spent on it. | Positive | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | it is really good, what turing has been done for the british government and all history of internet...................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! well done..keep it up......all coursera team......!!thank you for all your time and sharing valuable information with us....!Thank you....!! | ! thank you for all your | Time | and sharing valuable information with us. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | I liked that it was easy and at the same time I wanted it to be a bit harder. Very good, basic entry level course. Chuck is awesome as always! | was easy and at the same | Time | I wanted it to be a | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 2UHGXkNtEeSfwCIACxeXRw | It's really great too see the history of Computers, Internet, etc. Fantastic to watch all the interviews with the people who created Internet, First Web Server, WWW. I really enjoy it and it feels like exciting journey back in time! Thank You Dr. Chuck:) | feels like exciting journey back in | Time | Thank You Dr. Chuck:) | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | The Capstone Project makes you summarizes what you have learnt so far and take it to the next level, natural language processing . Besides, the ability to create a working app is a reward by itself. It is challenging and interesting at the same time. | challenging and interesting at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | The Capstone starts well with sufficient guidance. The second part gives much freedom however, it might be overwhelming and unclear at times what to do next. However, I loved going out on my own and slowly learning more and more on the subject. You can pretty much choose how much effort you put into it. | might be overwhelming and unclear at | Time | what to do next. However, I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | The course has nearly nothing to do with the previous themes. I already have had enough knowledge, but as there is no support by the team it seems to be rather time consuming for others. | team it seems to be rather | Time | consuming for others. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This was essentially a self-study project with some social peers. The topic, approach, and standards were different from all of the other units in the Data Science specialization. I found the other units more enjoyable. Learning the essentials of NLP quickly is necessary to begin the project. I ordered a textbook, for example, and I was fortunate that it arrived quickly. If NLP is a prerequisite for this capstone project - whether in the form of a prior class or textbook knowledge - this should be indicated clearly on the course description page. Nevertheless, the main learning that I achieved with this course was in the area of software engineering - specifically, how to take advantage of vectorization in R to achieve reasonable computing performance. While this is a valuable skill, it doesn't seem the proper focus of a capstone course in a sequence focused primarily on other topics. As noted elsewhere in these comments, there was a complete absence of any traditional teaching support. Learning outcomes suffered as result. The missing resources included instructors, mentors, partners, and learning materials. The course site notes an expected time requirement of a few hours per week. My commitment was 20 hours per week, under some pressure. Numerous students take this "course" multiple time, in order to arrange for reasonable software development time. Producing working software was fun, as it always is. The course learner community was supportive, which is fortunately typical for Coursera. All in all, this project was *not* an effective capstone for the Data Science specialization. The project was interesting in its way, but it felt 'parachuted in' to this learning sequence. | The course site notes an expected | Time | requirement of a few hours per | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This was essentially a self-study project with some social peers. The topic, approach, and standards were different from all of the other units in the Data Science specialization. I found the other units more enjoyable. Learning the essentials of NLP quickly is necessary to begin the project. I ordered a textbook, for example, and I was fortunate that it arrived quickly. If NLP is a prerequisite for this capstone project - whether in the form of a prior class or textbook knowledge - this should be indicated clearly on the course description page. Nevertheless, the main learning that I achieved with this course was in the area of software engineering - specifically, how to take advantage of vectorization in R to achieve reasonable computing performance. While this is a valuable skill, it doesn't seem the proper focus of a capstone course in a sequence focused primarily on other topics. As noted elsewhere in these comments, there was a complete absence of any traditional teaching support. Learning outcomes suffered as result. The missing resources included instructors, mentors, partners, and learning materials. The course site notes an expected time requirement of a few hours per week. My commitment was 20 hours per week, under some pressure. Numerous students take this "course" multiple time, in order to arrange for reasonable software development time. Producing working software was fun, as it always is. The course learner community was supportive, which is fortunately typical for Coursera. All in all, this project was *not* an effective capstone for the Data Science specialization. The project was interesting in its way, but it felt 'parachuted in' to this learning sequence. | students take this " course" multiple | Time | in order to arrange for reasonable | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This was essentially a self-study project with some social peers. The topic, approach, and standards were different from all of the other units in the Data Science specialization. I found the other units more enjoyable. Learning the essentials of NLP quickly is necessary to begin the project. I ordered a textbook, for example, and I was fortunate that it arrived quickly. If NLP is a prerequisite for this capstone project - whether in the form of a prior class or textbook knowledge - this should be indicated clearly on the course description page. Nevertheless, the main learning that I achieved with this course was in the area of software engineering - specifically, how to take advantage of vectorization in R to achieve reasonable computing performance. While this is a valuable skill, it doesn't seem the proper focus of a capstone course in a sequence focused primarily on other topics. As noted elsewhere in these comments, there was a complete absence of any traditional teaching support. Learning outcomes suffered as result. The missing resources included instructors, mentors, partners, and learning materials. The course site notes an expected time requirement of a few hours per week. My commitment was 20 hours per week, under some pressure. Numerous students take this "course" multiple time, in order to arrange for reasonable software development time. Producing working software was fun, as it always is. The course learner community was supportive, which is fortunately typical for Coursera. All in all, this project was *not* an effective capstone for the Data Science specialization. The project was interesting in its way, but it felt 'parachuted in' to this learning sequence. | to arrange for reasonable software development | Time | Producing working software was fun, as | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | As a capstone to a series of courses that covered data science and R, I found this one to be a bit lacking. There was no involvement from the professors at JHU or the folks at SwiftKey. As was mentioned in another review, the course feels abandoned. All you get a few short (two minutes or so) videos that give you little in the way of instruction or direction. Basically, they just say, "Go do this. Good luck!" There were also no Mentors or TAs to guide students or answer questions. It was the students helping each other through the forums. Sometimes it was helpful and everyone involved learned something. Other times, it was the blind trying to lead the visually-impaired. On a positive note, you will use all of the skills from the previous courses: writing R functions, performing exploratory analysis and publishing it via RPubs. Your final product will be displayed for everyone via ShinyApps and a presentation using R Presentation (also published via RPubs). On a(nother) negative note, the topic of Natural Language Processing is not an easy one to just walk into and feel confident in providing a working next-word prediction algorithm in about eight (8) weeks. You're reading academic journal articles, watching multiple videos from another Coursera course (which actually focuses on the topic of NLP, and takes place over several courses and several months!). Supposedly, there is work going on to update the course, so hopefully future students will get a better experience. I did take a bit away from this course, especially since I made more than one attempt to complete it. However, it was definitely a shock to find myself missing those things that one typically finds in a learning environment -- descriptive background, assistance to problems, etc. -- and seeing that I was for all intents and purposes on my own. Even in the professional world of data analysis, I have never experienced the lack of support that I found in this course. With that, I am giving it three (3) stars. As I said, I did learn a bit, but it was a bit of a struggle that required multiple attempts to complete. This would have been better off as a stand alone topic (which it already is by another Coursera affiliated school), or having a capstone course that builds on a topic more in the wheelhouse of the JHU professors: a capstone project focusing on bioinformatics or biostatistics would have been amazing in comparison to this. | and everyone involved learned something. Other | Time | it was the blind trying to | Negative | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | I enjoyed the course. This course took me waaaay more time than I thought because I struggled with a few issues. First, I wish I'd started by taking the NLP online course before starting the Capstone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aMYz1tMfPg). There was an issue installing RWeka, RJava and it took me several days to work through the issues. I eventually moved to using quanteda (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/quanteda/vignettes/quickstart.html). I also waited far too long to develop a method to test my model using a subset of the training data, so I could test whether changes to my model improved and reduced performance. It turns out that my model trained on a 25% sample performed just as well as a model trained on 100%. I'm thankful for the Discussion Forum and final peer review process. Both helped me learn how I can improve my model and demo application. I really appreciate the instructors for creating this specialization. I've learned a lot. | This course took me waaaay more | Time | than I thought because I struggled | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Of all the offerings in the specialization, this one felt like it was thrown together in less than hour. I expected to have to learn quite a bit of material on my own, but even the references to additional materials were very thin. I could have saved many days if more guidance on the project workflow would have been given. The pre-processing of the data was quite extensive (9 steps before generating the ngram tables I used in my model) and was the key to getting decent results IMHO, but one had to step on a quite a few landmines to figure this out. The problem was an interesting one and I ended up reworking it after passing with 95% (the only class in the specialization I didn't get 100% on) because I didn't have time to implement much of what I had to figure out by 'hard-knocks' | 100% on) because I didn't have | Time | to implement much of what I | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Great way to build up knowledge & experience .... A challenge considering the actual time needed for the Capstone project... but worth every single effort. | . A challenge considering the actual | Time | needed for the Capstone project. . | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | I currently taking this capstone and I must unfortunately say that this is the most worst course in the whole specialization. Of course the topic NLP and word prediction is interesting, but the problem is, that this is a dead course. A couple of students in the forum strugeling with details, but there is NO Mentor, no Professor or other course staff and no SwiftKey engineer as announced in the Project Overview. So everything you have to figure out completely by yourself and this takes a lot of more time than the 4-9 hours. And also why should you pay for a course where you learn anyway only ba your own. Pick any intersting topic you would like to work on and invest the time in this instead of paying for this Capstone without any support form Coursera, JHU or SwiftKey. | this takes a lot of more | Time | than the 4-9 hours. And also | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | I currently taking this capstone and I must unfortunately say that this is the most worst course in the whole specialization. Of course the topic NLP and word prediction is interesting, but the problem is, that this is a dead course. A couple of students in the forum strugeling with details, but there is NO Mentor, no Professor or other course staff and no SwiftKey engineer as announced in the Project Overview. So everything you have to figure out completely by yourself and this takes a lot of more time than the 4-9 hours. And also why should you pay for a course where you learn anyway only ba your own. Pick any intersting topic you would like to work on and invest the time in this instead of paying for this Capstone without any support form Coursera, JHU or SwiftKey. | to work on and invest the | Time | in this instead of paying for | Negative | 0.77 | 1.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Unfortunately this project is not fully aligned with all the previous program, which is a shame. Ideally, the project was more related to quantitative data, or have compulsory module NPL. It was certainly a very important learning, but very stressful to have to grasp NPL and do the project in a short time. Learning NPL in short time in a DIY way without any help it was very negative and stressful. | do the project in a short | Time | Learning NPL in short time in | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Unfortunately this project is not fully aligned with all the previous program, which is a shame. Ideally, the project was more related to quantitative data, or have compulsory module NPL. It was certainly a very important learning, but very stressful to have to grasp NPL and do the project in a short time. Learning NPL in short time in a DIY way without any help it was very negative and stressful. | short time. Learning NPL in short | Time | in a DIY way without any | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | I had no experience in natural language processing before I took this course, and now I'm kind of in love with it! Some of my fellow learners complained about the new data type and little information provided, but I feel this is a good simulation of real world experience as a data scientist! The field is constantly changing, so we have to be ready to cope with unfamiliar problems and come up with creative solutions. Due to other commitments, I was once 3 weeks behind the weekly deadlines, but finally poured all my efforts into this and deployed an App in time... You never know how much you can accomplish before you are forced to do a "Mission Impossible" ;-) I think I've improved my hacking + googling skills, and built more confidence over completion of this course. Thank you, JHU and Coursera! | this and deployed an App in | Time | . . You never know how | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 2y_2_3REEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Was a great course. There was no hand holding, this is the capstone so it was time to put everything to use on a problem that wasn't outlined for you and required you to self study and work with others to deliver. | is the capstone so it was | Time | to put everything to use on | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 33tTdzylEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | It really worth our time! Congrats to the Bocconi team! | It really worth our | Time | Congrats to the Bocconi team! | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 3791_tdbEeS2-SIAC4-TTw | Informative but there were less videos shown specially on real time situations. | less videos shown specially on real | Time | situations. | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| 3791_tdbEeS2-SIAC4-TTw | Great course to give you some pointers. Not a difficult or a deep one but definitely worth its time. | deep one but definitely worth its | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Compared with the regression course, this course was a slight disappointment. 1. there is less material compared to the regression course. Maybe this is because classification concepts are more intuitive. 2. the slides are much less prepared. Some of the sides even re-use earlier lesson slides in the beginning as a "review", much like soap operas re-use scenes from earlier episodes as "memory recall" to fill air time. 3. the math is more handwavy compared to the regression course. Neither course are supposed to go in depth with proofs, but I felt the regression course was at the right level and this course degraded too far. Do note it's very possible that I'm biased because I have seen more of the material from this course than the regression course. | " memory recall" to fill air | Time | 3. the math is more handwavy | Negative | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course has be described in a very precise manner. The instructor takes time to clearly explain the concepts and the importance of the same. | very precise manner. The instructor takes | Time | to clearly explain the concepts and | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | First. I like these courses allot. They are pretty close to covering just what you need to actually do machine learning in the real world and not dive too deep into topics that have no practical value. However: This course was a bit too thin, the last 4 weeks of the course contained little in depth informations and seemed to brush over allot of different topics that could have contained more information. Although they where important topics the course could go more in depth on at least 3 or 4 of those topics. The last 3 weeks could have been a course on its own if properly explored. However the concepts are well enough covered to be usable in practice i belive. The programming exercises where ridiculously simple. Everything was reduced to filling in 1 or two lines in a bigger function. I understand that the point was to see how these functions are made and that it increases our understanding of the algorithms already existing in packages like schikit-learn and graphlab. Also the content became a bit too repetetive (actually started in the second course but continues in this course). The time used on variation over the same topic in different models made it challenging to pay attention when the lecture finally came to a new point (brain fell a sleep while waiting for something new). | but continues in this course). The | Time | used on variation over the same | Positive | 0.64 | 3.0 |
| 3cmY9AVPEeWr2CIAC20DIw | Professor Singer does a wonderful job of bringing in lauded philanthropists to help make this course a reality. My only qualm was with my expectation of a greater philosophical aspect to the course: he does spend some time on Kant and Hume's ethical dichotomy which was wonderful though. | the course: he does spend some | Time | on Kant and Hume's ethical dichotomy | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3cmY9AVPEeWr2CIAC20DIw | Yet another good course that is ruined by a peer review requirement. Dr. Singer is a fascinating person to learn from and I am glad I took the time to pursue the course. | I am glad I took the | Time | to pursue the course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 3cmY9AVPEeWr2CIAC20DIw | For me it was a fantastic course. This is exactly that time in my life when I'm alwasy thinking about what I should work and how can I help as much as I can. This course helped me a lot and I recived a lot of good ideas for my essay and for my life also. | fantastic course. This is exactly that | Time | in my life when I'm alwasy | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 3e249OIsEeSdRSIAC3-Q-A | It wasn't structured that well, Plus most of had to make a digital marketing report for the first time without even a sample of how industry experts expect to see when they look ata repot | digital marketing report for the first | Time | without even a sample of how | Positive | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | Going through it for the second time this summer. My all time favorite Coursera course, and I've done almost ten... | Going through it for the second | Time | this summer. My all time favorite | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | Going through it for the second time this summer. My all time favorite Coursera course, and I've done almost ten... | second time this summer. My all | Time | favorite Coursera course, and I've done | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | I have taken many courses by now, however this course brings to mind the fantastic "A brief history of time". Both go above and beyond my wildest dreams, leaving my expectations so far as to be unable to recall them. I learned not only about Beethoven the composer; but developed a greater appreciation for him and his music, for his predecessors and those who followed his footsteps, the sonata form and many other forms, and perhaps more important to ponder about the nature of music itself and it's relevance in our life. His presentation of the musical question, quotation, program music, and the notion of "jokes" exposed and explained a musical paradigm far broader than affective or cerebral qualities. It stems from these observations that there is a very rich and capable language with its own strengths and weaknesses. In this case, the history of Beethoven's sonatas is then a very close look at a critical point in the life of this language that binds multiple stages into a consistent whole. This subjects quasi universal nature, spans multiple cultures and allows us to look into snapshots of the experience of life. And this presentation has provided me with the necessary training to be aware of this and also to slowly delve further into this subject. And I find this in itself to be a very significant reason why to study music in the first place. My deepest thanks to all who made this great work possible Wither music? Most certainly :) | fantastic " A brief history of | Time | . Both go above and beyond | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | Amazing course! I can now understand Beethoven's Sonatas in a much deeper level, as well as how performance and innovation evolved throughout time. | how performance and innovation evolved throughout | Time | | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | Extremelly interesting! I am so unhappy I don't have enough time now to attend the course properly. | so unhappy I don't have enough | Time | now to attend the course properly. | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | An excellent course. I ATTEND IT NOW FOR THE SECOND TIME. | ATTEND IT NOW FOR THE SECOND | Time | | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | This is, out of all the courses/studies I have done in my whole life, my favourite of all time. Mr Biss is a a wonderful lecturer. | whole life, my favourite of all | Time | Mr Biss is a a wonderful | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 3EPZVpSGEeSb9SIACzCJlg | I am about three-quarters of the way through this course and I am completely enamoured with Beethoven in ways that were impossible before taking this course. I love the depth that Professor Biss imparts without ever getting pedantic or overwhelming. I have now listened to all 32 sonatas, some several times more over the past several weeks and I feel so fortunate that I can love this music in a deeper, more passionate way because of the understanding I have gleaned from this class. Highly recommended for all musicians and music-lovers. | to all 32 sonatas, some several | Time | more over the past several weeks | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 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 | of the great players of our | Time | but also manages to simplify and | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course was detailed and very easy to understand. One thing I did have a problem with from time to time was differentiating between words - I've noticed that Korean words can be very close to one another and it's sometimes hard to tell if there's a space between two words or if those are actually one word. If this course could make the spaces between words bigger, it would be easier to see each word as it is instead of getting confused if a certain phrase is two separate words or one word. Thank you! | did have a problem with from | Time | to time was differentiating between words | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course was detailed and very easy to understand. One thing I did have a problem with from time to time was differentiating between words - I've noticed that Korean words can be very close to one another and it's sometimes hard to tell if there's a space between two words or if those are actually one word. If this course could make the spaces between words bigger, it would be easier to see each word as it is instead of getting confused if a certain phrase is two separate words or one word. Thank you! | a problem with from time to | Time | was differentiating between words - I've | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | This was such a fun and great course to follow. I really want to learn more Korean and this is great for starters. You will learn how to write Hangul and speak in a very easy way. The classes are not too difficult and you can keep up easily if you spend the time each week on each course. I recommend this for everyone who wants to learn the basics of Korean language. I finished today and I can't wait to get my certificate. Thank you so much Yonsei University! | up easily if you spend the | Time | each week on each course. I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | This was a wonderful class, but due to my schedule i was unable to finish. I would definitely like to take this again once I have more time. | this again once I have more | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | It was easy to follow the teacher and there was enough time to finish the classes. | the teacher and there was enough | Time | to finish the classes. | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I have been waiting for a Korean language course with coursera for a long time. it is very good course for beginner; I had all the explanations and the pronunciation techniques were helpful. | course with coursera for a long | Time | it is very good course for | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | This has been an exceptional course. I have really enjoyed it as an introductory course to Korean, because it does a good job of teaching the basics without trenching too much in the details. I believe that in beginning stages a learner should not boggle themselves down too much with the details of a language. With time and exposure details are learned. Our instructor was easy to comprehend in her English pronunciation; she was professional, and she seem to enjoy the topic. I feel confident in the foundation that has been set for me and therefore, I am confident to continue what I hope will become a lifetime journey of enjoying and learning Korean. | the details of a language. With | Time | and exposure details are learned. Our | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course is mind blowing! With time and patience it is easy to get the language and the phrases. I only struggled really hard with telling the time. Also being hard of hearing made it a little hard to pinpoint exactly what time they were talking about. Overall this course is wonderful and anyone who is interested in basics of Korean should take it! Thanks a lot!! | The course is mind blowing! With | Time | and patience it is easy to | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course is mind blowing! With time and patience it is easy to get the language and the phrases. I only struggled really hard with telling the time. Also being hard of hearing made it a little hard to pinpoint exactly what time they were talking about. Overall this course is wonderful and anyone who is interested in basics of Korean should take it! Thanks a lot!! | struggled really hard with telling the | Time | Also being hard of hearing made | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course is mind blowing! With time and patience it is easy to get the language and the phrases. I only struggled really hard with telling the time. Also being hard of hearing made it a little hard to pinpoint exactly what time they were talking about. Overall this course is wonderful and anyone who is interested in basics of Korean should take it! Thanks a lot!! | little hard to pinpoint exactly what | Time | they were talking about. Overall this | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Very well done as introductory course, easy to follow and detailed in the explanations. Helpful for whom wants to get closer to the Korean language for the first time. | the Korean language for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | It was a good class, and definitely laid down a foundation for learning and understanding the lesson. However, it was difficult at times trying to understand, the professor would say the Korean too swiftly. | lesson. However, it was difficult at | Time | trying to understand, the professor would | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Great introduction to the writing system for first time learners. | to the writing system for first | Time | learners. | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | It's best for someone who is beginner in learning Korean language. Also ias it is self paced you can get enough time to learn and revise the course. | self paced you can get enough | Time | to learn and revise the course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I learned Korean nearly 20 years ago and decided to work through this course as a refresher. The course is fairly well done. The pace is a little aggressive, which is fine if you take your time to learn each lesson before moving on. Language courses are not the kind where you can just listen and then take the quiz. Slow down. Practice. By week four the speakers in the audio files were speaking on a level where I was having difficulty distinguishing some of the words. In particular, the differences between the 20th and 21st of the month can be somewhat challenging for a beginning speaker of Korean. On the quizzes, I slowed down and repeated some of the audio. Even so, I missed a few questions. I think the course should take more care in producing the audio files and planning the questions. Some of those my be nearly impossible for beginners to get correct. | is fine if you take your | Time | to learn each lesson before moving | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | I understand the importance of reviewing other classmates work however with the time constraints of today's world, I believe it takes away from precious time that could be spent developing the craft of writing . | other classmates work however with the | Time | constraints of today's world, I believe | Positive | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | I understand the importance of reviewing other classmates work however with the time constraints of today's world, I believe it takes away from precious time that could be spent developing the craft of writing . | believe it takes away from precious | Time | that could be spent developing the | Negative | 0.91 | 3.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | The course helped me a lot in understanding what a plot is. This is my first time to join a creative writing class and I did not regret signing up. Thank you everyone for a very great course. | plot is. This is my first | Time | to join a creative writing class | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Fantastic class! The teachers is organized, charismatic, a respected author of such interesting subject matter. He brings relevant outside writers to interview about their viewpoints. The assignments are clear and really opened my mind to other ways of thinking. This series of classes is more than worth time and cost. | of classes is more than worth | Time | and cost. | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Great course, doesn't take much time and you can learn a lot about writing. | Great course, doesn't take much | Time | and you can learn a lot | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | This was a great way to get started writing again after a long time. The videos were engaging and full of good information. It's good to see and hear real authors talk about the work. | started writing again after a long | Time | The videos were engaging and full | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Interesting course with new outlook and perspective on writing. However, I did find it rather brief and not much interaction going on within the forums. People had to wait a long time for feedback and I also thought that those who had paid for the first of the 5 sections, should not be obliged to pay for the next four if they wanted at least to access the material,without being graded. That was a sour point to the overall positive structure of the course. | People had to wait a long | Time | for feedback and I also thought | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Brando did a great job in presenting a structure for plot. I think his insights are valuable and he did tried to offer practical guidelines writers can use. What I didn't like was the reviewing of the assignments. Some times I didn't receive valuable feedback ( the same sentence copy/pasted in every section) and someone failed me for not understanding my intentions because he was not an English speaker. Away from that, I really liked Brando, his style, and his involvement. | the reviewing of the assignments. Some | Time | I didn't receive valuable feedback ( | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | It's a good course. The explanations of plot and scene have made me understand for the first time what writing fiction is all about, and for the first time I was bale to write fiction that is better than anything I had ever written before. | made me understand for the first | Time | what writing fiction is all about, | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | It's a good course. The explanations of plot and scene have made me understand for the first time what writing fiction is all about, and for the first time I was bale to write fiction that is better than anything I had ever written before. | all about, and for the first | Time | I was bale to write fiction | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Good material. Brando Skyhorse is a very talented lecturer. The exercises look simple but are actually very difficult, so set aside more time than you expect to complete them within the parameters. | very difficult, so set aside more | Time | than you expect to complete them | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | The course was pretty easy to learn, but the assignments were challenging, which is the best combination of theory and practice in my opinion. Although I didn't have enough time to dive into discussions and get to know with the community, I'd recommend this course to anyone who's making his first steps in creative writing. It will teach you how to limit yourself in your writing, be consize and yet create stories that are both entertaining and thought provoking. | opinion. Although I didn't have enough | Time | to dive into discussions and get | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | The video lectures are very nicely done. They outline the basics of how a story line (Plot!) should be, how the characters should be developed and how scenes should be depicted. The tips given are practical and clearly defined - even for noobs The course motivated me to write, to refine my thoughts while writing and since there was always pressure of peers reviewing my work - I always revised what I wrote. I discovered that revision helps immensely, and I found I could express the same things in better ways and using lesser words Some students did have difficulties in understanding assignments - something that can get better with time. Also, I felt some learners received the brunt of bad grading since the grading guidelines weren't clear. Shaving off 1 star due to that | something that can get better with | Time | Also, I felt some learners received | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | I enjoyed this course; it provided a thorough overview of plot - well worth the time spent watching the videos and completing the assignments for myself. | of plot - well worth the | Time | spent watching the videos and completing | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Short, pithy descriptions; to the point advice/ suggestions with leeway to alter the structure. Worth the time. | to alter the structure. Worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | The material isn't bad, and it does provide some interesting prompts to think and write about. But, the curriculum is not at all creative. It focuses on easily teachable and repeatable lessons that teach a certain, standard way of doing things. It tries to reduce creative writing down to a formula instead of acknowledging that many compelling and successful stories can have almost any imaginable form. If perhaps many types of structures had been emphasized or structures had been pointed out as optional, this would have been mitigated, but the time period is so short that there's no time. The result is a class that feels more like "Writing: How to Make a Formulaic, Sellable Book" than anything with "Creative" in the title. | would have been mitigated, but the | Time | period is so short that there's | Negative | 0.91 | 2.0 |
| 3KNgoXgcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | The material isn't bad, and it does provide some interesting prompts to think and write about. But, the curriculum is not at all creative. It focuses on easily teachable and repeatable lessons that teach a certain, standard way of doing things. It tries to reduce creative writing down to a formula instead of acknowledging that many compelling and successful stories can have almost any imaginable form. If perhaps many types of structures had been emphasized or structures had been pointed out as optional, this would have been mitigated, but the time period is so short that there's no time. The result is a class that feels more like "Writing: How to Make a Formulaic, Sellable Book" than anything with "Creative" in the title. | is so short that there's no | Time | The result is a class that | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| 3oV7d6_HEeS5PyIAC4GQ5A | Similar to Part One, but continues with the history of rock into more recent times (1990s). Very short course compared to the other one. Pros and cons from Part One apply to Part Two. | history of rock into more recent | Time | (1990s). Very short course compared to | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 3TdKKA-VEeWhsgqB1eduww | Very clear to explain the concepts. It would be better if the professor offer us more time to go through the diagrams in the video rather than press the "pause" botton. | if the professor offer us more | Time | to go through the diagrams in | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Good presentations. Enjoyed the lectures, good information, and good illustrations and maps. I'm grateful to have this opportunity to learn about this period. Phillip Zelikow takes you through the history through time zones, while visiting various ideas and happenings around different parts of the world, and how they are interconnected. I would like to see some reading material for further understanding (not just suggested books). Overall, I would recommen | takes you through the history through | Time | zones, while visiting various ideas and | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | I just audited this course for the fun of it with an interest in seeing patterns from the past in order to understand our present. I enjoyed the presentation and the professor's thematic approach and his relaxed conversational presentation style. I feel like I got exactly what I hoped to get out of it. I particularly found his use of images from the various countries and time periods helpful and memorable. | images from the various countries and | Time | periods helpful and memorable. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | A great course on predominantly the western course of history from 1760 to 1910; one that focuses on ideas and movements that shaped the world, not a course that focuses on western history for reasons of eurocentrism alone. Where the course is eurocentric, it is so by necessity, a symptom of a well-balanced, well-structured course that strives for an approach that poses questions in an earnest and truthful manner. The professor who runs this course is a highlight. His voice and presentation style makes the course that much easier to enjoy. I hope to later follow him and pay attention to his external writings and insights, even in my time beyond studying this online course. | writings and insights, even in my | Time | beyond studying this online course. | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Excellent course. Good overview of history, well taught, and very much worth the time and the effort. | taught, and very much worth the | Time | and the effort. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | I loved attending the Modern World, Part one course. I have been a student of history all my life but i learnt a lot during the course. I would like to take up other history courses time permitting in future Thanks | to take up other history courses | Time | permitting in future Thanks | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | This course gave me an overall understanding of the globe of that period of time. This course helped me to understand why individual countries were in the situation they were. I am not into academic pursue but fully enjoyed the course. The professor was very clear about his ideas and pleasant to follow. Highly recommend for all people interested in modern history. | the globe of that period of | Time | This course helped me to understand | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Very interesting and intriguing, quizzes are a bit hard because they cover so much material so if you are a working individual I feel it's almost impossible to accomplish but it's nice for general knowledge. Two notes- First, it would be nice if the professor wouldn't use "get yourself comfortable" in the beginning of EACH video - it is a bit annoying. Second, on quizzes & tests it's recommended that you omit the sentence "in the presentation" that starts EVERY question/quizz/test because obviously it is based on what we are presented in the videos so it's just time consuming, in my opinion. Besides that, great for general knowledge, awesome teacher, I really enjoyed this course, thank you! | in the videos so it's just | Time | consuming, in my opinion. Besides that, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Professor Zelikow is making the subject interesting and is presenting me, for the 1st time with insight into the causes of many wars and revolutions in not only the Americas, but also in Europe and how they were all largely tied to the same causes. It has also opened my eyes to what is going on in the World today and how similar some of the underlying causes are the same now as they were in centuries past. | is presenting me, for the 1st | Time | with insight into the causes of | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | Very informative course. I had a fun time learning, so thanks! | informative course. I had a fun | Time | learning, so thanks! | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | There is much to praise: nice mapwork, a steady and organized march through time, and some interesting case studies (I especially enjoyed the lecture on Henry Adams). However, the title is a complete misnomer, as the course is regrettably white bread history. I found the approach stale and western-centric, as the content actually covers western Europe and the stretch of its influence through the time period. I also found myself questioning the veracity of many conclusions, as the lecture often had difficulty citing more than a couple specific points of evidence for his arguments. | a steady and organized march through | Time | and some interesting case studies (I | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | There is much to praise: nice mapwork, a steady and organized march through time, and some interesting case studies (I especially enjoyed the lecture on Henry Adams). However, the title is a complete misnomer, as the course is regrettably white bread history. I found the approach stale and western-centric, as the content actually covers western Europe and the stretch of its influence through the time period. I also found myself questioning the veracity of many conclusions, as the lecture often had difficulty citing more than a couple specific points of evidence for his arguments. | stretch of its influence through the | Time | period. I also found myself questioning | Positive | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| 3UY0FCmGEeWFggqB2SRvtQ | The course covers an extensive important period of time and in a very organized way. You never get lost. The quizzes are of remarkable level, very well-thought and never superficial. The way things get related and start making sense helped me get to another level in my knowledge of history. I will never study any subject without making reference to other important events that happened elsewhere. And will always refer my readings on this theme to what I learned in this course. Great chance to watch Professor Zelikow's classes from Brazil. Thanks Coursera! | covers an extensive important period of | Time | and in a very organized way. | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | I enjoyed the class, but was frustrated when it came time to get my Slidify to work on GitHub (since RPubs wasn't publishing them correctly.) I had to convert it to RPres (which was easy, thankfully) in order to get my project submitted in time. | but was frustrated when it came | Time | to get my Slidify to work | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | I enjoyed the class, but was frustrated when it came time to get my Slidify to work on GitHub (since RPubs wasn't publishing them correctly.) I had to convert it to RPres (which was easy, thankfully) in order to get my project submitted in time. | to get my project submitted in | Time | | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Really enjoyed learning how to build a Shiny App, and see a lot of use for this in my work environment. The Slidify product was not as useful - after 3 months of working on the project, I moved from Slidify to RPres, and was able to complete the project in very little time. | complete the project in very little | Time | | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Would like to use the time to learn more machine learning/predictive technique, etc. | Would like to use the | Time | to learn more machine learning/predictive technique, | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | The class was OK. This was the topic I was most excited to get to in the specialization, so I started playing around with Shiny, Slidify, and other tools ahead of time. Because I had gained some basic familiarity with those packages, this class was a bit of a letdown. I was happy with the week on making R packages. That was all new and fascinating. If you're looking for something more advanced than a very basic overview, you may want to look elsewhere. | Slidify, and other tools ahead of | Time | Because I had gained some basic | Negative | 0.79 | 3.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Saves the time to explore the options on your own, nice one! | Saves the | Time | to explore the options on your | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Lots of material in a short amount of time. | material in a short amount of | Time | | Negative | 0.74 | 3.0 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | This course is cooler than the title sounds. The emphasis is on developing data apps with Shiny. In my case, I had only part of a weekend to work hard on the course project, yet I was able to make a nifty little data app that even impressed a potential employer. Leave plenty of time for brainstorming ideas for the course project and you'll find it very rewarding too. | a potential employer. Leave plenty of | Time | for brainstorming ideas for the course | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Excellent course, informative, good use of visuals. Work is at an easy pace for those with less time. | easy pace for those with less | Time | | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I've taken a bunch of Coursera Courses, and these were my favorite. Fun to watch and packed with useful stuff I wish I had known a long time ago. | wish I had known a long | Time | ago. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Clear, to the point. Professors are great and provide tools that have, can and will be used daily. When your time is limited it becomes extremely valuable, and when you invest that time into something like this course and see that its worth every second of your time, WOW. Keep up the fantastic work. | will be used daily. When your | Time | is limited it becomes extremely valuable, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Clear, to the point. Professors are great and provide tools that have, can and will be used daily. When your time is limited it becomes extremely valuable, and when you invest that time into something like this course and see that its worth every second of your time, WOW. Keep up the fantastic work. | valuable, and when you invest that | Time | into something like this course and | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Clear, to the point. Professors are great and provide tools that have, can and will be used daily. When your time is limited it becomes extremely valuable, and when you invest that time into something like this course and see that its worth every second of your time, WOW. Keep up the fantastic work. | its worth every second of your | Time | WOW. Keep up the fantastic work. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I took this course as part of the Specialization. I wish I could put all the directors, VPs, and EVPs through this specialization. The tools, case studies, and resources alone make it worth the time and money. | resources alone make it worth the | Time | and money. | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The course overall provided me with useful ideas and methods for understanding my organization better and the psychology of the workplace. What drives individuals in an organization is a question that permeates the course, and ... how can leaders tap into common organizational behaviors to improve their management? Some of the examples are a bit tired if you've taken just about any psychology course, but the kernels of advice are worth the time if you want to understand your workplace better. | kernels of advice are worth the | Time | if you want to understand your | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I've enrolled in SIX mooc's over the last three years. This one has EIGHTEEN SEGMENTS in the WEEK ONE. That seemed daunting... until I did the first five. Short bursts of PURE ADRENALINE. This experience far outpaces all but one other mooc-- Creativity, Innovation & Change. I decided to take this one because a friend in my mastermind group asked if anyone else would take it with her. She is the Director of Coaching for a large soccer club in southern California. Makes sense for her. Simply BLOWS MY MIND. Well done! My only hesitation is that it will require at least 90 mins of concentration EVERY SINGLE DAY. That's more time than I bargained for. Hopefully it'll be worth it. | concentration EVERY SINGLE DAY. That's more | Time | than I bargained for. Hopefully it'll | Positive | 0.66 | 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 not working that well. the | Time | range is very short and the | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Dear Professors Scott DeRue and Maxim Sytch, Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge and time with us. Regards, | much for sharing your knowledge and | Time | with us. Regards, | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 41f7CjlXEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I found this to be an excellent course, great new insights for me combined with necessary refreshers. Well worth the time! | with necessary refreshers. Well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | This course helped me better understand the complexity of copyright. The teachers gave many useful examples and scenarios to clarify the frameworks and concepts of copyright. The course is well organized into manageable sections. The video lectures are extensive, and I did spend considerable time viewing them and completing the reading. This course is not what I would call easy. Be willing to put in time to complete this. I highly respect professionals who deal with these issues on a daily basis. | extensive, and I did spend considerable | Time | viewing them and completing the reading. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | This course helped me better understand the complexity of copyright. The teachers gave many useful examples and scenarios to clarify the frameworks and concepts of copyright. The course is well organized into manageable sections. The video lectures are extensive, and I did spend considerable time viewing them and completing the reading. This course is not what I would call easy. Be willing to put in time to complete this. I highly respect professionals who deal with these issues on a daily basis. | easy. Be willing to put in | Time | to complete this. I highly respect | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | Essential Readings for each unit. At | Time | I would miss these required readings | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | required readings on the outline. Other | Time | I would think they were required | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | the previous unit. Most of the | Time | I come across the supplementary readings | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | to take quizzes at least three | Time | and that you use the same | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | use the same quiz for each | Time | it is retaken. Something I would | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 487jV_KLEeS5LyIAC3lSsg | Organization of the class is clear and easy to follow. However, it might be better to place the Supplementary Readings after the Essential Readings for each unit. At times I would miss these required readings on the outline. Other times I would think they were required readings for the upcoming unit, when in actuality they were still part of the required readings for the previous unit. Most of the time, I come across the supplementary readings after the quiz has been taken. And when you're following the steps on the website the computer screen determines where you go once each step is completed. The quizzes at the end of each unit should be placed at the end of each unit. I appreciate the ability to take quizzes at least three times and that you use the same quiz for each time it is retaken. Something I would change about the quizzes is, that the quizzes display the questions that were asked, instead of just marking with a green check mark or red X next to the number and the question that was asked, once the quiz has been submitted. The videos and transcripts of those videos is very helpful. The videos are very clear and easy to understand. The content of the supplementary readings at times went over my head, but the content is both helpful and useful information.The due dates for each assignment was reasonable and flexible. Aside from including the questions asked for each quiz after submission I would change your policy of establishing the honor code. When attempting to have my picture taken along with my ID to establish identification my head didn't quite line up with the Head Frame displayed on my screen and the button needed to be pressed in order to take the picture. The button was either not visible or the head shot frame was too high up. I understand the need to establish ones identity during online classes, but wouldn't it be better to create a electronic pledge for the students to agree to? One that would uphold and honor the Coursera Honor Code; When someone is asked to type the same sentence repeatedly they're typing speed can increase because of the familiarity of that sentence. Also, the need to take more than one photo of the student before a quiz might make them feel uncomfortable. Especially, when the student is taking a quiz later in the day and may not exactly be "picture really". | content of the supplementary readings at | Time | went over my head, but the | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 4G2HtIWlEeSlzyIACiGe0w | I think is really useful! I found it in a great time, because I was desperate and I didn't know what to do about my professional project and I lived worried all the time. This course made me feel better, with a all world to make things different. Thanks. I didn't finish the last item: write my assignment. It is my fail. Outside of that, I think is a great course. The course is in spanish (I'm mexican), I think it would be great for non-speaking spanish people the use of subtitles in english. | I found it in a great | Time | because I was desperate and I | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 4G2HtIWlEeSlzyIACiGe0w | I think is really useful! I found it in a great time, because I was desperate and I didn't know what to do about my professional project and I lived worried all the time. This course made me feel better, with a all world to make things different. Thanks. I didn't finish the last item: write my assignment. It is my fail. Outside of that, I think is a great course. The course is in spanish (I'm mexican), I think it would be great for non-speaking spanish people the use of subtitles in english. | and I lived worried all the | Time | This course made me feel better, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 4gFDJxJhEeayXBIQdVd_6w | Was completely surprised by this course. There is so much information presented in a clear, understandable, and intriguing way. I was engaged the whole time. This class has been the catalyst I've needed for awhile to inspire me to pick up my guitar daily and make progress on ideas. Its so great to have a dependable structure to work with as opposed to hoping inspiration is enough to get me something good. I am so thankful this course exists and it so accessible. Highly recommend! | way. I was engaged the whole | Time | This class has been the catalyst | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 4gFDJxJhEeayXBIQdVd_6w | The course material and the instructor's lectures are excellent. However the quizzes are programmed incorrectly--marking wrong answers right and right answers wrong too often. I gained a few skills that I now put to use when writing songs. The course also provided some insightful information on prosody, phrasing, and a little bit of history. It was definitely worth the time I invested in doing this course. | history. It was definitely worth the | Time | I invested in doing this course. | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 4gFDJxJhEeayXBIQdVd_6w | I've been writing instrumental music for about 5 years now but could never put lyrics to my work. This course is proving to be really helpful and has provided lots of techniques and tools that are incredibly useful. On top of that I have to praise the instructor Pat Pattison. He has a lot of charisma and makes these lessons really fun - I've had to pause the videos a few times now just to laugh at his witticism. | to pause the videos a few | Time | now just to laugh at his | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 4gFDJxJhEeayXBIQdVd_6w | I thought the lessons were really boring, there are some interesting aspects about it, but it's hard to concentrate, Pat Pattinson couldn't get me hooked up all the time. | get me hooked up all the | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| 4JSB920jEeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | The View on Mobile app and Desktop is so different. When I posted week two work an old website I'd built populated. I didn't have time to even notice it. It did not meet assignment rubric. And once my classmates reviewed it and moved on I was forced to switch sessions because "nobody" was left to grade any resubmissions. That should have been visible in the mobile app. For a week I kept searching for the "problem" and the mobile app said all complete, the desktop assignment tab finally revealed my issue. | I'd built populated. I didn't have | Time | to even notice it. It did | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Thank you for a great course! This information is so valuable! But I would like to see the final test more distinctive, the questions are in some terms very vague. But all in all, I had a great time, thank you! | in all, I had a great | Time | thank you! | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Dear, I am very thankful to Coursera to create this wonderful Door towards achieving specialization. With this course i not only got knowledge but also a confidence. Fashion is passion for me, i wanted to do this course from a long time but for many reasons i could not afford it, with Coursera i got my "Dream Come True". I am, and will be always grateful to the creators of this wonderful platform. Now my only concern is how i can get onto this boat of Fashion and Luxury Business. Evening a small opening is enough to open the Doors in this business. Thank you. Regards, Junaid Ahmed | do this course from a long | Time | but for many reasons i could | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | The content of the course is very interesting, and I plan to go go through with it. A huge downside is that it is very difficult to follow the course because of the professors' strong accent and, at times, incorrect pronunciation. It is distracting. Also, it would be good to have weekly assignments, to stay on track. | the professors' strong accent and, at | Time | incorrect pronunciation. It is distracting. Also, | Positive | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Course is interesting, but sometimes its so hard to perceive the information with such accent :( I`m not lazy to read the subtitles, no.. but they also, from time to time work improperly and its not feasible at all to conceive the information . Plus, its absolutely inconvenient when you provide one huge assignment for several weeks at once! Why couldn`t you make it a few smaller to every week? (( I think I`ll disenroll | no. . but they also, from | Time | to time work improperly and its | Positive | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Course is interesting, but sometimes its so hard to perceive the information with such accent :( I`m not lazy to read the subtitles, no.. but they also, from time to time work improperly and its not feasible at all to conceive the information . Plus, its absolutely inconvenient when you provide one huge assignment for several weeks at once! Why couldn`t you make it a few smaller to every week? (( I think I`ll disenroll | but they also, from time to | Time | work improperly and its not feasible | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | Hi Everyone. I just enrolled in this course. This is one of best course I have taken online. I have a background in IT - Fashion Retail Business. I am hoping this course will help with career growth and I can learn some new and important topics about retails domain. Both the Instructors (Erica Corbellini and Stefania Saviolo) are good. I highly recommend this course to anyone wanting to learn more about retail domain and I had a great time taking it. Thank you. | domain and I had a great | Time | taking it. Thank you. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 4tHoAq3EEeSk9iIAC49U6w | I have always been interested in the fashion industry and found this subject not only informative, but also fascinating to go through. I enjoyed this immensely. Some information I knew, but there was a lot that also opened my eyes. My only negative was the clarity of the speakers English at times which made me have to either listen to the video again or use sub titles, otherwise I would give 5 stars. Other than that, a very informative and interesting course. Well put together and structured. Thank you. | clarity of the speakers English at | Time | which made me have to either | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | Not a bad course, but it is a python programming class. There are some steeper steps at times if you are not used to python. Support can seem distant if you hit one of these steeper steps. It's best to have a coding attitude and not a "I want to read about biology and genetics" attitude to approach this class. | There are some steeper steps at | Time | if you are not used to | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | Nicely designed course. Frustrating at times but well worth the effort. | Nicely designed course. Frustrating at | Time | but well worth the effort. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | Very good course, and very similar to the first course of the Bioinformatics Specialization. However be warned, it takes a lot of time and effort to complete this course (definitely more than 10 hours a week). | warned, it takes a lot of | Time | and effort to complete this course | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | An excellent course that is a great opportunity for anyone interested in bioinformatics, no previous experience is necessary but either a biological, mathematical or computing background will give you advantages in certain areas. Being a biologist I struggled at first and many of you may do the same but stick with it, work hard on it and you will be rewarded and it is incredibly satisfying. Due to the practical coding nature of the course, each week can take up a lot of you time. Best if you have a few weeks free (e.g. a graduate student like me) so you can spend a few whole days of it but could be done before/after work if you are motivated and plug away at it each day - just something to keep in mind though, don't expect a light easy 1 hour a week course, it is intensive but in a good way. It can get frustrating, you will want to give up time and time again....but stick at it and you will have a shiny new Coursera certificate and a wealth of programming knowledge under your belt once you finish! A massive two thumbs up for this course, one of the best ones out there that gives you real worthwhile skills that employers and academia want. Thanks to all the course staff for a great experience! | take up a lot of you | Time | Best if you have a few | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | An excellent course that is a great opportunity for anyone interested in bioinformatics, no previous experience is necessary but either a biological, mathematical or computing background will give you advantages in certain areas. Being a biologist I struggled at first and many of you may do the same but stick with it, work hard on it and you will be rewarded and it is incredibly satisfying. Due to the practical coding nature of the course, each week can take up a lot of you time. Best if you have a few weeks free (e.g. a graduate student like me) so you can spend a few whole days of it but could be done before/after work if you are motivated and plug away at it each day - just something to keep in mind though, don't expect a light easy 1 hour a week course, it is intensive but in a good way. It can get frustrating, you will want to give up time and time again....but stick at it and you will have a shiny new Coursera certificate and a wealth of programming knowledge under your belt once you finish! A massive two thumbs up for this course, one of the best ones out there that gives you real worthwhile skills that employers and academia want. Thanks to all the course staff for a great experience! | you will want to give up | Time | and time again. . . . | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | An excellent course that is a great opportunity for anyone interested in bioinformatics, no previous experience is necessary but either a biological, mathematical or computing background will give you advantages in certain areas. Being a biologist I struggled at first and many of you may do the same but stick with it, work hard on it and you will be rewarded and it is incredibly satisfying. Due to the practical coding nature of the course, each week can take up a lot of you time. Best if you have a few weeks free (e.g. a graduate student like me) so you can spend a few whole days of it but could be done before/after work if you are motivated and plug away at it each day - just something to keep in mind though, don't expect a light easy 1 hour a week course, it is intensive but in a good way. It can get frustrating, you will want to give up time and time again....but stick at it and you will have a shiny new Coursera certificate and a wealth of programming knowledge under your belt once you finish! A massive two thumbs up for this course, one of the best ones out there that gives you real worthwhile skills that employers and academia want. Thanks to all the course staff for a great experience! | want to give up time and | Time | again. . . . but stick | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 4vLX1NAeEeWihQ6ogHC6vQ | This is not a beginner's course unless you already have previous programming experience. The Python lessons are just samples taken from a completely different curriculum on Codecademy and poorly integrated into the bio-centric course content. The lessons are disjointed, taken out of context, and some of the examples are using the wrong version of Python and missing parentheses. It would be a lot better if they took the time to actually craft custom Python lessons designed specifically for this course instead of using ill-fitting lessons from other classes. | lot better if they took the | Time | to actually craft custom Python lessons | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There are steps that are missing at times which require you to scour for help. There are also quirks that aren't mentioned that other students have to point out. Unaddressed questions in the discussion board required escalation. Feels rushed and it's hard to learn for a beginner. Feels like you're just going through the motions and copy and pasting code. | are steps that are missing at | Time | which require you to scour for | Positive | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I am a bit disappointed by this course. I was expecting a more fast paced course with more information regarding Angular. Unfortunately in the videos there is a lot of time spent on unnecessary details and reading out loud the source code. The exercises are quite basic and they did not pose real challenges - except for errors coming from mismatched packages or mistakes in configuration files. Also I think that the level of support provided by the mentors of this course is lacking. Mentors are quite absent and very late in providing any help in the forums so the students have to kind of counsel one another - that is sometimes good but a proper class also requires a good level of supervision. All in all I think this is an OK course that is mostly geared to the uninitiated. It needs some serious work to make it a great course. | videos there is a lot of | Time | spent on unnecessary details and reading | Negative | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There are no advanced stuff these what is taught are basics any graduate or undergraduate student can easily pickup on his/ her own interest. What a waste of time . | own interest. What a waste of | Time | . | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course need more time to understand the concepts, compare to the previous course. The professor is great, he tries to explain the concept really well. | This course need more | Time | to understand the concepts, compare to | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | A whole lot of information to absorb, that I will definitely agree with! If there was anything I wish went into more detail, there would be two things. 1) Yo / Yeoman: This part of the course was more of an "Obligatory" lecture, just to say it's mentioned. I watched that one video many times over, but still ended up going to YouTube for actual "training" on the ins and outs. I know time is constrained in MOOC's and you don't get the full load of knowledge you would in a traditional school. However, my thoughts are that either give us an exercise so we can at least have that as experience in using it, or just remove it completely. The lecture was put together as a sort of "Follow Along", but it really felt rushed and more of an "Obligatory" thing than an actual lesson. 2) Give us more detail on the difference between Services and Factories. Keep in mind that I still have Multi-Platform Mobile App Development, and Server Side Development with Node.js still to go, so I don't know if these are explained more in those courses. As it stands right now, I -still- don't know the difference between a factory and a service, or even what a provider is. When should I use a factory? When should I use a service? Which is better suited for what task? All those questions I do not have an answer for after this course, which feels a bit short for me. | I watched that one video many | Time | over, but still ended up going | Negative | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | A whole lot of information to absorb, that I will definitely agree with! If there was anything I wish went into more detail, there would be two things. 1) Yo / Yeoman: This part of the course was more of an "Obligatory" lecture, just to say it's mentioned. I watched that one video many times over, but still ended up going to YouTube for actual "training" on the ins and outs. I know time is constrained in MOOC's and you don't get the full load of knowledge you would in a traditional school. However, my thoughts are that either give us an exercise so we can at least have that as experience in using it, or just remove it completely. The lecture was put together as a sort of "Follow Along", but it really felt rushed and more of an "Obligatory" thing than an actual lesson. 2) Give us more detail on the difference between Services and Factories. Keep in mind that I still have Multi-Platform Mobile App Development, and Server Side Development with Node.js still to go, so I don't know if these are explained more in those courses. As it stands right now, I -still- don't know the difference between a factory and a service, or even what a provider is. When should I use a factory? When should I use a service? Which is better suited for what task? All those questions I do not have an answer for after this course, which feels a bit short for me. | the ins and outs. I know | Time | is constrained in MOOC's and you | Negative | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Angular JS is a crucial component of all of the internet. Hardly a website exists without it and it's clear that Angular will go places. However, this course fails on a few crucial levels. As such, my review might look scathing and I'll detail why in a minute, but I want you to know that this course is quite possibly invaluable when it comes to web development. Besides, the fixes that would need to be made on the instructor's side are minor, but when working without those fixes, things get infuriatingly frustrating rather quickly. There are errors in the code supplied by the instructor that need to be pointed out by students, scripts sometimes don't work, explanations are sub-par when explaining things such as $scope. There are parts that are seemingly there to pad out the lessons such as Task Runners. Sometimes, doing things exactly the way shown in the video with additional fixes by both the professor and students, it still doesn't work. Some exercises are an hour long for something that won't be quizzed in the end. Understanding that this review was made about a new course that covers something rapidly changing and not persistent, I still did learn a lot of valuable things and I would recommend this course to everyone involved in web development. However, be prepared to question your own sanity, your skills, the software you use, software in general and just despair at times. All in all, it is a price worth paying for the amazing knowledge you gain. | in general and just despair at | Time | All in all, it is a | Positive | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course is deceivingly full of content. If you want to get through this course you need to have a lot of time on your hands because of the shear amount of debugs your code will produce even if you follow the steps to the letter. So many things are taught over a 4 week period that if you do not do the extra reading to understand what is happening you will get an overview of angularjs, bower, gulp, grunt, yo, yeoman and so on without really knowing how to use any of these tools again. Also because of the number of interdependent parts to the application you create, when the professor decides to give you one of the html or js files again to do an assignment, chances are everything will break and you will spend a long time figuring out which variables' names have been changed and blabla... The professor does not give you a good basis for debugging your code, you need to modify the set up of gulp to show understandable stack traces to figure out what is going wrong. If you want a challenging course where you have to go the extra mile learning things from documentation and blogs to substitute the lack of detail in order to complete the course, than this is the course for you! I think this course needs to be restructured and the length increased to 6 weeks instead of 4, with more detailed content and understand of each tool and especially more on angularjs | need to have a lot of | Time | on your hands because of the | Negative | 0.86 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course is deceivingly full of content. If you want to get through this course you need to have a lot of time on your hands because of the shear amount of debugs your code will produce even if you follow the steps to the letter. So many things are taught over a 4 week period that if you do not do the extra reading to understand what is happening you will get an overview of angularjs, bower, gulp, grunt, yo, yeoman and so on without really knowing how to use any of these tools again. Also because of the number of interdependent parts to the application you create, when the professor decides to give you one of the html or js files again to do an assignment, chances are everything will break and you will spend a long time figuring out which variables' names have been changed and blabla... The professor does not give you a good basis for debugging your code, you need to modify the set up of gulp to show understandable stack traces to figure out what is going wrong. If you want a challenging course where you have to go the extra mile learning things from documentation and blogs to substitute the lack of detail in order to complete the course, than this is the course for you! I think this course needs to be restructured and the length increased to 6 weeks instead of 4, with more detailed content and understand of each tool and especially more on angularjs | and you will spend a long | Time | figuring out which variables' names have | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Really the best!!! But It will be good if lecture includes some errors we can make and silly mistakes which affects results adversely. Jogesh sir is very good teacher and he is clear and brief in less time | is clear and brief in less | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Takes a bit of time to get adjusted to the workflow. It's a bit trial and error, especially if your using Windows. Best bet is to use a unix-terminal so if you have windows use a terminal like Git Bash. Overall it's a very good course and gets you into the meat and bones of Web Development. Just remember to come with patience and do things on time :). | Takes a bit of | Time | to get adjusted to the workflow. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Takes a bit of time to get adjusted to the workflow. It's a bit trial and error, especially if your using Windows. Best bet is to use a unix-terminal so if you have windows use a terminal like Git Bash. Overall it's a very good course and gets you into the meat and bones of Web Development. Just remember to come with patience and do things on time :). | with patience and do things on | Time | :). | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Pity that people had to spend more time on making the plugins work than actually doing the exercises/assignments but good content nonetheless. | that people had to spend more | Time | on making the plugins work than | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Hard work, I had to watch most of the videos at least twice so took much more time than I anticipated. I'm glad I stuck with it because it made the start of the next course much easier. Very satisfying to have completed it. | least twice so took much more | Time | than I anticipated. I'm glad I | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | You get to learn a lot about AngularJS and other tools. I enjoyed learning this course. It was demanding at times but in the process you get to learn a lot of things, so it was rewarding. | this course. It was demanding at | Time | but in the process you get | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This one was much tougher than the previous two courses. Out of four weeks, I ended up delivering my assignments overdue on three occasions, which really has not impact on your grade, but it shows that this time around it is a bit more difficult to complete them. AngularJS is the bread and butter in the industry. All in all, I would say you could already code a basic website from head to toe, including very basic server setup, after completing this class. | grade, but it shows that this | Time | around it is a bit more | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course is nice, however the assignments are the same every time and the pace is too slow. The final week suddenly too compact, and testing/yo is not assigned at all. | the assignments are the same every | Time | and the pace is too slow. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very good overview and step by step dive into this javascript framework. The instructor knows how to deliver one piece of information at a time and with simple exercices to put it into practice. The assignments are not very hard, but they give you confidence in what you have learned. | one piece of information at a | Time | and with simple exercices to put | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | simply a great course! it's long but the time dedicated to it os worth it. | great course! it's long but the | Time | dedicated to it os worth it. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Was very difficult to follow. This is a complex subject and the prof is trying his best, but there are times the explanation is not sufficient. Instructions for installing gulp was not good. I was unable to complete the following exercises after gulp installation failed. Instruction needs to be short and crisp. Building on top of each other project has its negative. There must be solution at the end or at least a check point where you can start clean for the next project. | trying his best, but there are | Time | the explanation is not sufficient. Instructions | Negative | 0.87 | 2.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very interesting course and very well structured. The subjects are handled with the correct depth corresponding to its importance. The indicated time spent by week corresponds accurately to the time needed, if you have some previous experience in web development. The exercises are focused in the important details and very well organized. If you have interest in client side web development and particularly in Angular, this is a very good opportunity to learn. Probably in a near future this course must be updated to cover Angular 2.0. It really worth the time spent! | corresponding to its importance. The indicated | Time | spent by week corresponds accurately to | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very interesting course and very well structured. The subjects are handled with the correct depth corresponding to its importance. The indicated time spent by week corresponds accurately to the time needed, if you have some previous experience in web development. The exercises are focused in the important details and very well organized. If you have interest in client side web development and particularly in Angular, this is a very good opportunity to learn. Probably in a near future this course must be updated to cover Angular 2.0. It really worth the time spent! | by week corresponds accurately to the | Time | needed, if you have some previous | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very interesting course and very well structured. The subjects are handled with the correct depth corresponding to its importance. The indicated time spent by week corresponds accurately to the time needed, if you have some previous experience in web development. The exercises are focused in the important details and very well organized. If you have interest in client side web development and particularly in Angular, this is a very good opportunity to learn. Probably in a near future this course must be updated to cover Angular 2.0. It really worth the time spent! | 2. 0. It really worth the | Time | spent! | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I think it's a very good introduction to AngularJS. You learn and understand what you're doing in almost lessons. I'd hardly recommend it to any beginner !!! I found that the 4rth week was very very compressed. You could spend 1 more week explaining all the Front-End tools such as Gulp, Grunt, Yo (Yeoman) etc. And go deeper with the AngularJS as well. In some points I felt myself alone with no teacher support regardless there's a students forum. I'd improve the transparency and the communication teacher-student. Anyway I very happy to spent that time on this course he explains really paciently :D | I very happy to spent that | Time | on this course he explains really | Negative | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Although a good introduction course, sometime is focus on javascript tools rather than on AngularJS itself which, in hand, looses time and doesn't explain/give examples on how to create directives and filters, which are two core functionalities of this framework. | AngularJS itself which, in hand, looses | Time | and doesn't explain/give examples on how | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course is excellent; however, it requires more time than promised... | is excellent; however, it requires more | Time | than promised. . . | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course had some rough spots here and there, but taking it as a whole, I still give it 5 stars. Why? a) The professor. Professor Jogesh has a great sense of humour and was entertaining enough to keep the classes lively and entertaining to the end. (Even if I did play the video at 2x speed most of the time :) b) The forums. There were a lot of experienced dudes on the forums who were willing to help out with bugs and any configuration issues. The professor also appeared on the forums from time to time. That's gold dust when learning a topic for the first time. c) Depth and pace of coverage. A lot of different topics were introduced and covered well enough for me to be able to use them in my projects and to further explore them without feeling overwhelmed. d) The assignments. They were not too daunting, but were excellent to drive home key points covered in the lectures. e) Peer review of assignments. I learnt some good techniques by reviewing the code of more experienced fellow classmates taking the course. f) Most important of all, the structure and pace of the course were balanced well enough for me to stay with it and to feel that I'd learnt a lot by its end. You will not be an AngularJS expert after 4 weeks, but will have covered relevant subtopics in enough depth to be able to progress further with confidence. | at 2x speed most of the | Time | :) b) The forums. There were | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course had some rough spots here and there, but taking it as a whole, I still give it 5 stars. Why? a) The professor. Professor Jogesh has a great sense of humour and was entertaining enough to keep the classes lively and entertaining to the end. (Even if I did play the video at 2x speed most of the time :) b) The forums. There were a lot of experienced dudes on the forums who were willing to help out with bugs and any configuration issues. The professor also appeared on the forums from time to time. That's gold dust when learning a topic for the first time. c) Depth and pace of coverage. A lot of different topics were introduced and covered well enough for me to be able to use them in my projects and to further explore them without feeling overwhelmed. d) The assignments. They were not too daunting, but were excellent to drive home key points covered in the lectures. e) Peer review of assignments. I learnt some good techniques by reviewing the code of more experienced fellow classmates taking the course. f) Most important of all, the structure and pace of the course were balanced well enough for me to stay with it and to feel that I'd learnt a lot by its end. You will not be an AngularJS expert after 4 weeks, but will have covered relevant subtopics in enough depth to be able to progress further with confidence. | also appeared on the forums from | Time | to time. That's gold dust when | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course had some rough spots here and there, but taking it as a whole, I still give it 5 stars. Why? a) The professor. Professor Jogesh has a great sense of humour and was entertaining enough to keep the classes lively and entertaining to the end. (Even if I did play the video at 2x speed most of the time :) b) The forums. There were a lot of experienced dudes on the forums who were willing to help out with bugs and any configuration issues. The professor also appeared on the forums from time to time. That's gold dust when learning a topic for the first time. c) Depth and pace of coverage. A lot of different topics were introduced and covered well enough for me to be able to use them in my projects and to further explore them without feeling overwhelmed. d) The assignments. They were not too daunting, but were excellent to drive home key points covered in the lectures. e) Peer review of assignments. I learnt some good techniques by reviewing the code of more experienced fellow classmates taking the course. f) Most important of all, the structure and pace of the course were balanced well enough for me to stay with it and to feel that I'd learnt a lot by its end. You will not be an AngularJS expert after 4 weeks, but will have covered relevant subtopics in enough depth to be able to progress further with confidence. | on the forums from time to | Time | That's gold dust when learning a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course had some rough spots here and there, but taking it as a whole, I still give it 5 stars. Why? a) The professor. Professor Jogesh has a great sense of humour and was entertaining enough to keep the classes lively and entertaining to the end. (Even if I did play the video at 2x speed most of the time :) b) The forums. There were a lot of experienced dudes on the forums who were willing to help out with bugs and any configuration issues. The professor also appeared on the forums from time to time. That's gold dust when learning a topic for the first time. c) Depth and pace of coverage. A lot of different topics were introduced and covered well enough for me to be able to use them in my projects and to further explore them without feeling overwhelmed. d) The assignments. They were not too daunting, but were excellent to drive home key points covered in the lectures. e) Peer review of assignments. I learnt some good techniques by reviewing the code of more experienced fellow classmates taking the course. f) Most important of all, the structure and pace of the course were balanced well enough for me to stay with it and to feel that I'd learnt a lot by its end. You will not be an AngularJS expert after 4 weeks, but will have covered relevant subtopics in enough depth to be able to progress further with confidence. | learning a topic for the first | Time | c) Depth and pace of coverage. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 52blABnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I love the style of the courses in this specialization. The exercises are useful and set you up for the assignments. I also really appreciate how the instructor guides you in the use of tools like bower, grunt, gulp and yo, and that he takes the time to cover unit and end-to-end testing. Looking forward to the next course! | yo, and that he takes the | Time | to cover unit and end-to-end testing. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5AYG1NbQEeWEOQ7ZE5jC0Q | So far the topics are very interesting but the accent of the teacher is sooo difficult to follow and distracts me! Also, she is looking down to read all the time and this doesn't reflect her knowledge. | looking down to read all the | Time | and this doesn't reflect her knowledge. | Negative | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| 5g_hAYo4EeWTzg6WBWinhQ | although this is my first time in learning about Design thinking, I'm happy to say that I love the way Coursera put together the specialization. I am really excited about what I have learnt so far, most especially in this first week alone! for instance I got to here about the importance of instrumenting observation at the design and experimentation stage of a product and releasing in small batches as way of achieving expected outcome. I look forward to more opportunities to learn more about Design Thinking under Coursera and her partner institutions. Thank you | although this is my first | Time | in learning about Design thinking, I'm | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 5g_hAYo4EeWTzg6WBWinhQ | The value of this course exceeded my expectations. The course contains lots of useful, relevant and well-structured information related to Agile practices and Design Thinking. I knew about Agile before taking the course, and had been practicing it for some time in one way or another, but this course has greatly improved my understanding of basic principles of agile and, more importantly, taught me some very specific approaches and methodologies which can be applied to real-life projects. I highly recommend this course to anyone interested in Agile or IT development in general. | had been practicing it for some | Time | in one way or another, but | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I am an MBA and have studied marketing but this course was an addition to my knowledge of strategy. The content was practical and readily applicable to everyday business scenarios. I have been thinking about my own business for some time and I found this course tailored for myself. This course helped me develop strategic thinking. | about my own business for some | Time | and I found this course tailored | Positive | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | This was an excellent course. The examples and diagrams that were used to explain concepts and situations were effective. The professor's teaching style was effective and engaging. It was worth my time! Namita A Shrivastav | and engaging. It was worth my | Time | Namita A Shrivastav | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | So far , very interesting and covers much of the material that was covered in my Strategy Course in my MBA. It has been a delightful course as a refresher and putting more up-to-date examples than when I covered much of this material some time ago. Have another 2.5 weeks to go but I will look for more courses from LMU & Tobias ! | covered much of this material some | Time | ago. Have another 2. 5 weeks | Negative | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Great course and well worth the time. I took this as a refresher and enjoyed it immensely. Great content, good lecturer. | Great course and well worth the | Time | I took this as a refresher | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I have mixed feelings about this course. From a instructor and content perspective, this is by far the best. Tobias is a great teacher and he explains the concepts very nicely followed up by quizzes. What I hated about this course was the web exprience and how the final questions were set up. It gave a feeling that the intent was to "get you" vusrses questions that were more to see if a student has understood the concepts. Some of the multiple choice answers were borderline and a rational mind could go either way. So my suggestion is to significantly rewamp your quizzes. From a technical perspective, the system did not capture my results the first time, It graded me differently on the same set of questions (this needs to be really looked into) for example the first time I answered the question a certain way, it marked me correct, however the same answer in the next attemp was marked wrong??? This lead to a lot of confusion (and I am not saying because the numbers in the answers were changed on different attemps but the content itself was marked differently). I loved this course and would have loved to attempt the advanced strategy course however but for the above reasons will not. Its dissapointing that although the instructure and content is world class the technical glitches are too many for a student to have a seamless, learning experience. Hope this helps and topics mentioned aboove would be seriously looked into. I want this course to be a success as this the one of the most insightful courses that I have taken. | not capture my results the first | Time | It graded me differently on the | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I have mixed feelings about this course. From a instructor and content perspective, this is by far the best. Tobias is a great teacher and he explains the concepts very nicely followed up by quizzes. What I hated about this course was the web exprience and how the final questions were set up. It gave a feeling that the intent was to "get you" vusrses questions that were more to see if a student has understood the concepts. Some of the multiple choice answers were borderline and a rational mind could go either way. So my suggestion is to significantly rewamp your quizzes. From a technical perspective, the system did not capture my results the first time, It graded me differently on the same set of questions (this needs to be really looked into) for example the first time I answered the question a certain way, it marked me correct, however the same answer in the next attemp was marked wrong??? This lead to a lot of confusion (and I am not saying because the numbers in the answers were changed on different attemps but the content itself was marked differently). I loved this course and would have loved to attempt the advanced strategy course however but for the above reasons will not. Its dissapointing that although the instructure and content is world class the technical glitches are too many for a student to have a seamless, learning experience. Hope this helps and topics mentioned aboove would be seriously looked into. I want this course to be a success as this the one of the most insightful courses that I have taken. | looked into) for example the first | Time | I answered the question a certain | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Good introductory class to the topic. Much time spent on examples. However, each module feels somewhat a bit disconnected from the other ones. A case study or example which would navigate students through all 6 modules would greatly help students remembering it all. | introductory class to the topic. Much | Time | spent on examples. However, each module | Negative | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I liked the course, it opened my eyes to new ways of thinking, and I'm continuing the advanced competitive strategy course. The approach of making models and calculations to see what the best strategy for a given company is, can help greatly with making sense of a chaotic world. Minor points to better the course: The lectures are sometimes too simple, especially the examples given can be sped up, up the ante ;)!. In the quiz one whole answer is false if one of the sub-answers is false, especially with 10 answers to give, I sometimes had a hard time to pass a question due to this reason, can this be resolved a bit? Say for example, a question is passed if 80% of the sub-answers are correct? Overall... thanks dear Tobias for having me in your class! Greetz Floor | give, I sometimes had a hard | Time | to pass a question due to | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | This Course teaches you about the basics of Strategy making and clearly explains about the step by step approach with real time examples .Beauty of the course is no prerequisites are required and explanation of the content is of top notch | step by step approach with real | Time | examples . Beauty of the course | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 5iIbgmdpEeW0sAqIx1_alQ | I really want to thank you all! In fact ,i never have experienced that awsome lecture! The embryology is the most diffucule lesson to me,and through this lecture,I don't think it is boring and hard to understand.At the same time, I really acknowledge using what you have leraned is the coolist thing in the world.You can figure out how responsible the teachers are(include every individuals who participate in this lecture's making) !thank you all again!! | hard to understand. At the same | Time | I really acknowledge using what you | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 5iIbgmdpEeW0sAqIx1_alQ | Nice course, a difficult one but very challengeable. Nice structure and easy to understand. I wanted to refresh my knowledge in anatomy and in such gained a whole lot more in return. Thanks to the Professors for their time and effort in making this MOOC. Very pleased. | Thanks to the Professors for their | Time | and effort in making this MOOC. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 5JJoCSsxEeWWnhJMxi0Z9Q | Great course. Good explanations and examples. The quizes and tests are not very easy sometimes, but they do you let think again. Very enjoyable! Just the course I was looking for a long time! | I was looking for a long | Time | | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 5nAQCXqJEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Every time one hear if you are not getting an interview call then it means your resume writing skills are not excellent, you are not able to project your self, you are not able sell your self or you might be overqualified / under-qualified. If you ask them for help, 90% are not in a position to guide you, 9% would support you, provide some reasons, but you still you feel handicap. I am lucky to find my 1% who hold my hand and walked me through each stage , educated me with the explanation why to write like this way in 21st century. In my view it is the right time everyone must gain this skill of 21st century resume and cover letter writing . We need to overwrite now, the old traditional way of resume and cover letter writing. Thanks to Charles Duquette and Daniela C. Wagner-Loera for making this excellent course easy to understand. | Every | Time | one hear if you are not | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5nAQCXqJEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Every time one hear if you are not getting an interview call then it means your resume writing skills are not excellent, you are not able to project your self, you are not able sell your self or you might be overqualified / under-qualified. If you ask them for help, 90% are not in a position to guide you, 9% would support you, provide some reasons, but you still you feel handicap. I am lucky to find my 1% who hold my hand and walked me through each stage , educated me with the explanation why to write like this way in 21st century. In my view it is the right time everyone must gain this skill of 21st century resume and cover letter writing . We need to overwrite now, the old traditional way of resume and cover letter writing. Thanks to Charles Duquette and Daniela C. Wagner-Loera for making this excellent course easy to understand. | my view it is the right | Time | everyone must gain this skill of | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 5NGh4meREeSxSCIAC1SPQw | This course is very complete, the readings are understandable and also the classes. It does require some more time comparing to other courses, but it's definitely worth it. I've learned so much i can't even believe it. The only thing i'd maybe change is in one of the modules (week 5) it's kind of confusing how to submit the results of a review of some essays. that's it. | classes. It does require some more | Time | comparing to other courses, but it's | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5qe8W_5iEeSiniIAC1OXJA | Awesome course! Pretty dense material but it is so well explained that the complexity of the subject is actually mastered. I confess that I watched each week's lectures twice in order to get a real good grasp on the subject. The first time I did it slowly, takin detailed notes, the second time just paying attention to the explanation in order to review and understand better. I took me more time than what I usually spend on other courses, but it was mostly due to me being a novice on the subject. | grasp on the subject. The first | Time | I did it slowly, takin detailed | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 5qe8W_5iEeSiniIAC1OXJA | Awesome course! Pretty dense material but it is so well explained that the complexity of the subject is actually mastered. I confess that I watched each week's lectures twice in order to get a real good grasp on the subject. The first time I did it slowly, takin detailed notes, the second time just paying attention to the explanation in order to review and understand better. I took me more time than what I usually spend on other courses, but it was mostly due to me being a novice on the subject. | slowly, takin detailed notes, the second | Time | just paying attention to the explanation | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 5qe8W_5iEeSiniIAC1OXJA | Awesome course! Pretty dense material but it is so well explained that the complexity of the subject is actually mastered. I confess that I watched each week's lectures twice in order to get a real good grasp on the subject. The first time I did it slowly, takin detailed notes, the second time just paying attention to the explanation in order to review and understand better. I took me more time than what I usually spend on other courses, but it was mostly due to me being a novice on the subject. | understand better. I took me more | Time | than what I usually spend on | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | This course is great! The materials provided are topnotch. In addition, the instructor was very active in the discussion forums during the period i enrolled; He was very helpful. As well as students who had enrolled at that period of time. (July to September 2016) I think anyone with some background in molecular biology can handle this course. Plus, do most of the labs in Firefox or any other browser namely Opera, Safari as an example. Google chrome doesn't support the Java apps you'll use in this course. | had enrolled at that period of | Time | (July to September 2016) I think | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Great Introduction to the topics and broad concepts of bioinformatics. If you are looking for a course that goes gives you a sense of the breadth of the field, this is the place to start. The learn-at-your-own-pace was also great for me, since time commitments and travel schedules make it difficult for me to block out a set time each week to complete each lesson-- so the flexibility was great! | was also great for me, since | Time | commitments and travel schedules make it | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Great Introduction to the topics and broad concepts of bioinformatics. If you are looking for a course that goes gives you a sense of the breadth of the field, this is the place to start. The learn-at-your-own-pace was also great for me, since time commitments and travel schedules make it difficult for me to block out a set time each week to complete each lesson-- so the flexibility was great! | me to block out a set | Time | each week to complete each lesson-- | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Excellent course, I've learnt a lot. Maybe the labs are a little "do what I'm saying", but that is only if you are looking for the Certificate. If you dedicate enough time to read and "play" a little bit, it's a very complete course. | the Certificate. If you dedicate enough | Time | to read and " play" a | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Excellent course! The course is enjoyable and thorough, and at the same time, it does not require any deeper molecular biology knowledge or extra computational skills. | and thorough, and at the same | Time | it does not require any deeper | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | I think it is a good MOOC, but is the less interesting mood of the specialized course. Still, it has a lot of information, and extra sources that help me. The teacher seems a little confused some times an use to distract me. | teacher seems a little confused some | Time | an use to distract me. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Honestly didn't learn much from this course. The majority of content is simply common sense, and things you'll know if you've spent any time on the internet in the recent years. The good parts were the evaluation of different marketing channels (traditional and digital) and various stats on how people spend from the industry (ownership of TV networks, time spent per day on different media, etc.). | you'll know if you've spent any | Time | on the internet in the recent | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Honestly didn't learn much from this course. The majority of content is simply common sense, and things you'll know if you've spent any time on the internet in the recent years. The good parts were the evaluation of different marketing channels (traditional and digital) and various stats on how people spend from the industry (ownership of TV networks, time spent per day on different media, etc.). | the industry (ownership of TV networks, | Time | spent per day on different media, | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | all video lectures feel like they are just read from a paper and it takes a lot of effort to follow and engage. It is the 4th course I'm taking to get ma digital marketing specialisation and is far off the poorest. The slides don't make much sense and a lot of times I have to research stuff again on other websites to actually get the point. The quiz questions are sometimes not related to the topic. It seems like, the professor does not know enough about the subject to speak freely and engaging about the topics. I'm quite disappointed about this course and can not recommend it. I think the course should be worked over. A great example of how to do it right is Aric Rindfleischs lecture, which was engaging, challenging and very well structured | much sense and a lot of | Time | I have to research stuff again | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Not up to my expectations. Compared to the previous modules in this specialisation, the lectures are dry, the presenter is not focused and slides are sometimes mixed up. The reading material is great and a definite plus is that it is free. But the lectures should be more practical (not just the bullet points of the book), and the weekly assignment should not be a chapter summary question. The course developers should have taken the time to develop a case study for each topic, like in the first module in this spec. I highly recommend reviewing and improving the content. | course developers should have taken the | Time | to develop a case study for | Negative | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The slides were too brief, felt presenter at times was reading off a script which made some of the lectures less interesting to follow. | were too brief, felt presenter at | Time | was reading off a script which | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | This instructor is god-awful, I'm sorry to say. By the 3rd week, I stopped caring about this class, and my grade for that week definitely expresses my disinterest. I'm having to force myself to finish it. Has she ever taught a class before? I felt like this was her first time. Uninspired - not looking forward to her next class. | felt like this was her first | Time | Uninspired - not looking forward to | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | waste of time. | waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The lessons on presentation skills and traditional media should have taken just one one or two minutes, and one or two slides, at most. The details and time invested really had little to do with digital marketing or the digital landscape. The use of the hand-written pros and cons was an unnecessary novelty. Regular bullet text are more readable and technically more reliable. Most of all, the presenter's style was distracting. It seemed that she was unsure of her subject matter and script. I recommend re-scripting and rehearsing the presentation -- before re-shooting it. Finally, with the rapid pace of change in digital, we should not be using reading material more than two or three years old. Five years is tantamount to a generation in the digital world. | slides, at most. The details and | Time | invested really had little to do | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | I enjoyed the difficulty of this course, however at times the questions seemed irrelevant and frustrating to find the information that the questions referred to. I believe some refinement is due here, but the difficulty was satisfying difficult compared to previous courses! | difficulty of this course, however at | Time | the questions seemed irrelevant and frustrating | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Wow that was a waste of my time. So many broken elements, mistakes etc. Last minute rush job putting this course together. | that was a waste of my | Time | So many broken elements, mistakes etc. | Negative | 1.0 | 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. | feeling that it is waste of | Time | -quizz questions are hardly connected to | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Some times the questions in the test were in my opinion irrelevant to the material. | Some | Time | the questions in the test were | Positive | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | Very good, informative and useful. My only wish is that the presenter was a bit more natural, rather than appearing to read the text off the screen all the time. But that is just a minor comment | text off the screen all the | Time | But that is just a minor | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 6-FfIC8hEeWUWxIOAnoaFQ | Excellent course as excellent is THE STRATEGIST'S TOOLKIT book (my guide, my advisor). What I am lerning with Professor Lenox is really of a great value because when I hear his lesson automatically, come to my head many ideas that allow me to see my failures and mistakes that I will try not to repeat again, and at the same time, new ideas flow to be analysed and decide wheather or not to be put in practice for better results. | repeat again, and at the same | Time | new ideas flow to be analysed | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 68PSjeudEeWwngojZhi1dw | The videos could not be too longer than they actually are. If this change, could be done, the student or user could have more time to dig into the assignments problems and even read more textbooks related to the main topic. | student or user could have more | Time | to dig into the assignments problems | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| 68PSjeudEeWwngojZhi1dw | This is not a class I would normally pursue. I took it as part of the "Data Mining" certification. That being said, this class was wonderful. I learned the basics of text retrieval and search engines. I went from knowing nothing, to having a working sense of how search engine algorithms work. It was a challenging course for me, but very much worth the time and effort I put into it. It was like pulling back the curtain on the code behind Google, Netflix, and Amazon searches, and that has made me think of the world in a different way. I am now a human happily collaborating with machine learning systems. Thank you!! | me, but very much worth the | Time | and effort I put into it. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | I really liked this course.The lecture was really interesting and its the first time i felt like the assignments was fun. | really interesting and its the first | Time | i felt like the assignments was | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | Well done. I learned a lot with this. Simple and complex at same time :) | this. Simple and complex at same | Time | :) | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | Instructor was fun, but a little stiff. It's his first time teaching, so I can forgive it though. The work was a little tedious. I wish there was more variety in the assignments than just updating the same game. | a little stiff. It's his first | Time | teaching, so I can forgive it | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | This course inspire me a lot. It is not easy, but with tons of fun. I spent a long time to think out the idea and make it and improve it. I did progress in gaming making as a fresh man. Thank you! | of fun. I spent a long | Time | to think out the idea and | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | I love the way Fran managed to fulfill his lections with a theory. It was very simple and very informative at the same time | and very informative at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | Course that do not require lots of time but put your creative mind on work and push it truly far making a simple game detailing before its workframe. | that do not require lots of | Time | but put your creative mind on | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | I liked the fact that the course starts from and covers the very basics. The videos were fun to watch and the course taught a lot through the assignments. With very less time commitment , the course taught me to make my first board game. | through the assignments. With very less | Time | commitment , the course taught me | Positive | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | This course was interesting. It's truly an introduction to the field. I've actually read about Game Design in my spare time and it was nice to remember some of the concepts I've seen. It's all positive and good but I'd have liked to see the assignments handled a bit differently. It just felt too much one way, especially with one page rule. I do understand this is done to keep people organized and not going crazy with their ideas because since it's peer reviewed it should be fair. Also, once your game idea from an earlier week didn't have much room to introduce the aspect presented in the current week you feel kind of stuck. Although assignments mention we should build on previous weeks' games there is also mention to building a new game too. That part could be clarified or the nature of the exercise can be much more varied than one page requirement. | about Game Design in my spare | Time | and it was nice to remember | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| 6DwzaCw7EeWGvAojQA48rw | Great course which takes a little time per each week but gives much info for future game designers. | Great course which takes a little | Time | per each week but gives much | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | The course is great for beginners into the filed of learning to be reporting. I am happy i signed up for it though it was a bad time at work to focus on the course but I did. I look forward to completing the remaining courses required for specialisation. Thankyou coursera and the Michigan State University for the opportunity. | it though it was a bad | Time | at work to focus on the | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | A great place to start for blossoming journalists. This will teach you basic skills that you utilize many times in a journalism career. | basic skills that you utilize many | Time | in a journalism career. | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Very well organized and explained. The ideas were easy to understand and follow as a native English speaker but was also inclusive for foreign learners as well. Gave a great introduction to Journalism and Ethics. I also appreciated that the length of the course was manageable for someone with a full time job. | manageable for someone with a full | Time | job. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | I appreciate the fact that this course doesn't go into the fine detail on how to code everything, I believe there is still more information on the coding and data management practices that could be included in the course content. In addition to that, I feel the course could use the following adjustments to make it better: 1 - Have Python students grade other Python students and SAS students grade other SAS students. While it is nice to get exposure to another language, it is more than enough to learn one at a time. 2 - Add quizes and/or other well formed questions that are graded (automatically, not peer graded) to help enforce the concepts being taught. 3 - Make the assignment instructions/expectations more clear. I feel there are times when the grading criteria don't exactly match the requested assignment. While people follow the spirit of the assignment, the grading questions may ask for slightly different or additional items. 4 - Certain aspects of statistical analysis are glossed over and should be covered in more depth in the training videos. While I like the short videos for brevity, I would prefer to watch 10-15 minutes more content and really feel like the material was well covered. | enough to learn one at a | Time | 2 - Add quizes and/or other | Negative | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | I appreciate the fact that this course doesn't go into the fine detail on how to code everything, I believe there is still more information on the coding and data management practices that could be included in the course content. In addition to that, I feel the course could use the following adjustments to make it better: 1 - Have Python students grade other Python students and SAS students grade other SAS students. While it is nice to get exposure to another language, it is more than enough to learn one at a time. 2 - Add quizes and/or other well formed questions that are graded (automatically, not peer graded) to help enforce the concepts being taught. 3 - Make the assignment instructions/expectations more clear. I feel there are times when the grading criteria don't exactly match the requested assignment. While people follow the spirit of the assignment, the grading questions may ask for slightly different or additional items. 4 - Certain aspects of statistical analysis are glossed over and should be covered in more depth in the training videos. While I like the short videos for brevity, I would prefer to watch 10-15 minutes more content and really feel like the material was well covered. | more clear. I feel there are | Time | when the grading criteria don't exactly | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | There is a lot of self-teaching with these courses because there are no professors present to reach out to with questions. In addition, the course staff do not always respond promptly nor are they fully knowledgeable about all aspects of error messages that may arise out of coding. At times the code that were provided in the lecture videos were out of date and a lot of time was spent on googling to find the updated code. This is definitely not a beginner coder course and I do not recommend it to anyone who has not coded before. | may arise out of coding. At | Time | the code that were provided in | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | There is a lot of self-teaching with these courses because there are no professors present to reach out to with questions. In addition, the course staff do not always respond promptly nor are they fully knowledgeable about all aspects of error messages that may arise out of coding. At times the code that were provided in the lecture videos were out of date and a lot of time was spent on googling to find the updated code. This is definitely not a beginner coder course and I do not recommend it to anyone who has not coded before. | of date and a lot of | Time | was spent on googling to find | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | Simple and powerful Course. If you are a beginner. Just follow the instructions and Assignment Schedule. The course may seem a bit easy, if you are good at math and have some prior programming experience, yet you can be surprised with what new you learned by the end of the Course, considering the time you spend. Also you develop sound reasoning to answer your own questions regarding handling and presenting Data. The clarity you develop is worth it. | end of the Course, considering the | Time | you spend. Also you develop sound | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | So far, course is one of the best I am taking. It moves at a slow enough pace that you feel you can actually learn explore but at the same time are not bored. The videos are well done and have the right balance of interesting content and skill building. | learn explore but at the same | Time | are not bored. The videos are | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 6JyoHjVOEeWBMQ5pdIoFkQ | The highest video production values of any class I've seen on Coursera so far. Unfortunately, that's the best part of the class; the support is simply nonexistent (a post by someone associated with the staff from a previous run of the course suggests getting help troubleshooting Python from Coursera staff), the instructions for the class software are out of date, the source material for the assignments is sometimes unsuitable to the task you're asked to perform (e.g. statistical analysis on a data set aggregated from disparate sources), and the pretty videos are at times completely unrelated to the actual assignments (the very first week with the literature review). Dropping this specialization like a hot coal; it looked quite promising, but the aggravation over the poor organization and lack of support considerably outweighs anything I could get out of it. | and the pretty videos are at | Time | completely unrelated to the actual assignments | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The information was perfectly curated for this course. It's all very interesting, and they cover a large spam of time with the key aspects of each time or movement without it being tiring, too technical or repetitive. | they cover a large spam of | Time | with the key aspects of each | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The information was perfectly curated for this course. It's all very interesting, and they cover a large spam of time with the key aspects of each time or movement without it being tiring, too technical or repetitive. | with the key aspects of each | Time | or movement without it being tiring, | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | I'm three weeks into and really enjoying this course. It's light – about 2-3 hours a week so far, plus maybe one film, feels sufficient. The student is free to choose her degree of intensity. At the same time it opens a richness of vistas on the study of film in general as well as the course content. I think it's a good model for the massive online course: both highly customisable and sufficiently demanding (deadlines are essential) to maintain engagement. | degree of intensity. At the same | Time | it opens a richness of vistas | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 6kAowBObEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | It is an informative and well-prepared course and you can see how much time the professors have spent. | and you can see how much | Time | the professors have spent. | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | The course laid out the concepts pretty well but if one had access to the materials, the lectures were not really necessary to understand the concepts. This was because the lectures were pretty much a re-reading of the materials and more importance could be placed on creating scenarios where the processes would be applicable. This would be a far better use of the lecture time than trying to combine the two and not doing a good job of either. | far better use of the lecture | Time | than trying to combine the two | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 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. | so if you are concerned with | Time | requirements, I don't think you need | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | I had a great time learning . It was fun as well as informative. Maybe we can have a story competition in another of your courses. | I had a great | Time | learning . It was fun as | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | This course has some very distinct and informative material which was terrific for learning about writing for young readers. I particularly found Maria Gill's modules very informative, encouraging and well presented. What I found REALLY disheartening, was that we as students (who aren't qualified and at times, have questionable English literacy skills), were the ones who were given the task of assessing all of the assessments in this course. I was really hoping for feedback from the industry experienced course creators :( . The other thing that was frustrating is that 'word count' was a criteria. Some students were brutal in their grading because one was over the word count by a few words, so be aware of that, if you are going to undertake this 'course'. This is not so much a course which leads to some sort of exam or qualification (dictionary.cambridge.org) but an independent information acquirement experience. I learnt quite a lot about writing and publishing and would encourage you to do this course, as it does contain some great information and tips, just be aware that grading is based on newbies like us and sometimes the feedback can be a bit disheartening but just persevere and you will learn lots. These people really know what they are talking about. | students (who aren't qualified and at | Time | have questionable English literacy skills), were | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | I did the MOOC just to break the ice and have a general idea about this world of writing for young audiences. I think the course is fair and quite complete, has some very interesting insights, and the videos as very informative and the perfect lenght (by the time your head can't take more info, they are over). Thank you very much, it has been a pleasure. | and the perfect lenght (by the | Time | your head can't take more info, | Positive | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | I enjoyed this course to the fullest extent possible. I loved how they made a few short videos every lesson instead of one long one like other courses provide. It made it incredibly manageable and easy to invest time into. It was a great learning experience and I will be looking into furthering my opportunities to become a published author because I now have the confidence and a bit more knowledge on the industry. Thank you so very much. | incredibly manageable and easy to invest | Time | into. It was a great learning | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | A pretty basic but very enjoyable and thorough course in writing for younger readers. I really enjoyed my time on this course. | younger readers. I really enjoyed my | Time | on this course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | These were very short lectures without a lot of content. For example the different kinds of publishing were described but no time was spent on how to evaluate publishers or how to decide what might work best for the author. The interviews with the published authors was by far the best part of this class and I enjoyed listening to them describe their writing lives. | of publishing were described but no | Time | was spent on how to evaluate | Negative | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | I want to give it 3 1/2 starts - sometimes the modules seem really segmented and you spend half the time repeating the same ideas or recapping the course material (that was new that week!). While the assessment tasks were great exercises, the fact that they're peer-reviewed means that the feedback you get is often unhelpful or poorly informed. It was a good course to do, but I don't think it's really going to change anyone's life (and I would encourage people to not take the peer feedback too seriously!). | segmented and you spend half the | Time | repeating the same ideas or recapping | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| 6mOCpgP8EeWmBSIAC9UI2A | I loved the course. It was very informative and the interviews with authors were very special. I hope there will other courses for writers, new and accomplished, in the future. Thank you very much for taking time to put the course together. | Thank you very much for taking | Time | to put the course together. | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 6OW7QJ3WEeWILQ7D3uPEMw | I am working as an organisational consultant and thought this would add some knowledge - however it is really difficult to follow because it seems repetitive to me... I have paid for the certificate and still it is difficult for me to focus. It seems there is too much information and too much talk for things that are easily understood and do not need all this going over and over again. I got bored by the time I got to week 3 and it is seems impossible to stay focused and complete all assignments. I hope this changes in my third and last chance to get the certificate... | again. I got bored by the | Time | I got to week 3 and | Negative | 0.62 | 3.0 |
| 6OW7QJ3WEeWILQ7D3uPEMw | This course is straightforward, and at the same time deep going. the reading and available books on the topic, enable considerable in depth study. I find the work load very reasonable, still I have the impression I have learnt a lot. | is straightforward, and at the same | Time | deep going. the reading and available | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 6r0j3li_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This was the worst course I have taken with ASU on Coursera. Feedback was minimal and the system had many technical issues. Videos didn't start properly and there was no help or feedback from the instructors or the peers. I have wasted a lot of time resubmitting my assignments due to technical issues. Waste of my time. | I have wasted a lot of | Time | resubmitting my assignments due to technical | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| 6r0j3li_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This was the worst course I have taken with ASU on Coursera. Feedback was minimal and the system had many technical issues. Videos didn't start properly and there was no help or feedback from the instructors or the peers. I have wasted a lot of time resubmitting my assignments due to technical issues. Waste of my time. | to technical issues. Waste of my | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 6VIQlm6rEeSDGiIAC1sNTA | This course not only takes the time to explain the topics clearly and concisely they also take the time to explain the simple things like the roots of the words. | This course not only takes the | Time | to explain the topics clearly and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 6VIQlm6rEeSDGiIAC1sNTA | This course not only takes the time to explain the topics clearly and concisely they also take the time to explain the simple things like the roots of the words. | and concisely they also take the | Time | to explain the simple things like | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 71uAg8wYEeSyoSIACwgCjw | In getting feedback from my peer review which I am very open to feedback however, I guess I did not appreciate being told what I should or shouldn't do in my classroom with my kids. I appreciate suggestions for improvement but, I felt that more critique was on my teaching style than my writing. Again I appreciate feedback, but unless in my classroom with my kids and doing something I have done numerous times at the request of my own principal I did not thin it was fair. Also, as a teacher there is never just one way of doing things there is always multiple ways and being told to do it one way, there way was not appropriate at least for me so, this course although very | doing something I have done numerous | Time | at the request of my own | Positive | 0.77 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | As annoying as the auto-grader was at times, I still enjoyed the course. The material was properly presented and curated which goes to say a lot of blood, tears and sweat was definitely put into the course. I highly recommend this course for beginning programmers and/ or more experienced programmers who many want to familiarize themselves with python syntax or get a refresher. A big thank you to the team and the initiatives behind this course most especially Professor Severance who has a unique style and engaging style of content delivering. | annoying as the auto-grader was at | Time | I still enjoyed the course. The | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | For those who all are thinking of how and where to start learning Python, this is the right place. This introductory course is excellent course. I hope i need not say that a course don't become excellent on its own it need people to make it excellent and Prof. Charles and his team have indeed done an excellent job. I wish to continue learning with Prof. Charles and am looking forward for the advance my learning of Python and if possible other programming languages. This is the best time to be alive for those who want to continously learn and advance in life, thanks to platform like Coursera and the people involved in their mission to bring this vast amount to knowledge to the general public at large. Thank you | programming languages. This is the best | Time | to be alive for those who | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Funnest MOOC I have enrolled on yet. Learnt a lot in a short period of time, great for beginners. | lot in a short period of | Time | great for beginners. | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Professor is clear, interesting and enjoyable to listen to. Learned a lot, the class can definitely be completed within a week but he is concise. Star taken off due to lack of serious challenge but I would definitely recommend this to someone learning programming for the first time!! | someone learning programming for the first | Time | ! | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr Severance is really an amazing teacher - he conveys rather complicated information in an easy to digest format. Also, what a bad ass for dedicating so much of his personal time for a free class. So very much appreciated. | dedicating so much of his personal | Time | for a free class. So very | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course was really great only because of my mentor and his teaching methods I loved learning for the first time in my life. | I loved learning for the first | Time | in my life. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A good introductory course. Lots of time spent explaining basic concepts with good examples. Be sure to get the book (free pdf available) and read the chapters to help you with the assignments. | A good introductory course. Lots of | Time | spent explaining basic concepts with good | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very well done course. It's very slow, so if you're looking for something akin to a full time college course, I would take this at either double or triple the pace the course recommends. It's geared towards people who have never developed or really looked at code at all, so if you have, you'll be ahead of the pack. Overall, I enjoyed the course a lot. It definitely covered things from many angles and went through things slow enough for me me to process everything. That said, I was also able to increase the speed of the videos and complete a few weeks in one when I had the time. Fun class | for something akin to a full | Time | college course, I would take this | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very well done course. It's very slow, so if you're looking for something akin to a full time college course, I would take this at either double or triple the pace the course recommends. It's geared towards people who have never developed or really looked at code at all, so if you have, you'll be ahead of the pack. Overall, I enjoyed the course a lot. It definitely covered things from many angles and went through things slow enough for me me to process everything. That said, I was also able to increase the speed of the videos and complete a few weeks in one when I had the time. Fun class | in one when I had the | Time | Fun class | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I took this Course time ago and multiple Python Courses, from Coursera, Edx and Code Academy, I really like the explanations and speed of the course, The Professor is awesome, I will recomend this Course to anybody looking to start Coding. | I took this Course | Time | ago and multiple Python Courses, from | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Whatever level you are at programming, you will learn something new with this course because of the amazing teaching style provided by Dr. Chuck. Takes a seemingly complex subject and makes it incredibly simple and comprehensible to everyone! LOVE LOVE LOVE this course and any course taught by Dr. Chuck. This is part of an entire specialization. The only thing that is really lacking is an in-depth discussion of OOP. He briefly touches on it so that you know to go and look at it on your own time, but I wish he touched on it a little more. Nonetheless, 5/5 on this course. Thanks Dr. Chuck and supporting staff that make this course worth taking. The forum is still ACTIVE and if you run into problems a TA will be there to help you out! Critically to anyone's style of learning. | look at it on your own | Time | but I wish he touched on | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is an excellent course about beginning of python programming, I recommend to take it, the material is clear and you can repeat the videos every time that you need. | you can repeat the videos every | Time | that you need. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent course - well worth the time! | Excellent course - well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A great Course for beginners with no background in programming. The professor takes his time and explains everything in details. The material is clear and the assignments are good way to practice and test your understanding. Thank you! | in programming. The professor takes his | Time | and explains everything in details. The | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course was amazing!! I previously had taken Python course from other university from an other website.It was very difficult and lost interest since it was first time I was dealing with python and the difficulty level was too much for a fresher to Python. But this was easy yet interesting as well :) and I am very happy Thank you Charles Sir !!! :) | lost interest since it was first | Time | I was dealing with python and | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A great introduction into fundamental concepts in Python. Dr. Chuck is a perfect teacher, funny, competent and engaging. You will watch the videos in no time! Also, the electronic version of the book is free and covers every problem you can possibly come across in this course. My recommendation: install Python on your computer immediately after enrolling and track the differences between Python 2 (course version) and Python 3. For example, instead of using "print x", you will use "print(x)". | will watch the videos in no | Time | Also, the electronic version of the | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Awesome experience. Dr. Chuck is a good teacher, gives real time examples, walked us through his world tour. Perfect Videos , sessions.I would give 10/10 for Dr.Chuck , Sir you are the best. | is a good teacher, gives real | Time | examples, walked us through his world | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I have had a wonderful experience with this basic python programming. Dr.Charles is funny and at the same time informative. Looking forward for more lectures from him. | is funny and at the same | Time | informative. Looking forward for more lectures | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | really like this course, professor is pretty cool the way he explain all things is very impressive and videos are amazing even you don't get bored and lot's of thing you will learn in a small interval of time | learn in a small interval of | Time | | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I feel good! It was my first step to be a programmer! This course was step by step and it cause to learn more and spend more time for learning! | to learn more and spend more | Time | for learning! | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | a very very nice course made by a funny and good teacher, the course will help you step by step on learning the basics of python by showing you explanations followed by a quiz (not really hard but very useful for the purpouse of helping the user to remember the lessons) and then by a proper exercise, the only thing i would add it would be a specific lesson on punctuation and syntax of the python lenguage becouse a couple of time i've been struggling with exercises and the problem were indentations and some punctuation. Thank you a lot mr. Chuck, coursera and the community! | python lenguage becouse a couple of | Time | i've been struggling with exercises and | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Awesome experience of learning Python basic in such short period of time. The way the instructor explained makes the subject matter very easy even for a non-programmer like me. I am very satisfied with the course. | basic in such short period of | Time | The way the instructor explained makes | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I tried to learn Python 2 years ago. But I was naive and studied other courses at the same time. During this time I was also working night shifts. I had to quit all courses when I found a new job and they never amounted to anything. I am so happy that I now have found Coursera and this is my first course at Coursera. I have really enjoyed it and it has had a nice level for beginners and smart exercises which make the student really learn the skillsets previously explained in the chapter. I would also like to thank you for releasing the book in ibooks format. This was my first time trying out that format and it made the whole experience so much better and easier. Thanks again! | studied other courses at the same | Time | During this time I was also | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I tried to learn Python 2 years ago. But I was naive and studied other courses at the same time. During this time I was also working night shifts. I had to quit all courses when I found a new job and they never amounted to anything. I am so happy that I now have found Coursera and this is my first course at Coursera. I have really enjoyed it and it has had a nice level for beginners and smart exercises which make the student really learn the skillsets previously explained in the chapter. I would also like to thank you for releasing the book in ibooks format. This was my first time trying out that format and it made the whole experience so much better and easier. Thanks again! | at the same time. During this | Time | I was also working night shifts. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I tried to learn Python 2 years ago. But I was naive and studied other courses at the same time. During this time I was also working night shifts. I had to quit all courses when I found a new job and they never amounted to anything. I am so happy that I now have found Coursera and this is my first course at Coursera. I have really enjoyed it and it has had a nice level for beginners and smart exercises which make the student really learn the skillsets previously explained in the chapter. I would also like to thank you for releasing the book in ibooks format. This was my first time trying out that format and it made the whole experience so much better and easier. Thanks again! | ibooks format. This was my first | Time | trying out that format and it | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Quite good, sometimes the lecture slides spent a little too much time on explaining a basic concept. For example, it probably isn't necessary to repeatedly explain a loop iterating 5 times until the end of the loop. But otherwise the course cleared up a few things that I was having a hard time wrapping my head around with a different crash course I took in another class. | slides spent a little too much | Time | on explaining a basic concept. For | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Quite good, sometimes the lecture slides spent a little too much time on explaining a basic concept. For example, it probably isn't necessary to repeatedly explain a loop iterating 5 times until the end of the loop. But otherwise the course cleared up a few things that I was having a hard time wrapping my head around with a different crash course I took in another class. | repeatedly explain a loop iterating 5 | Time | until the end of the loop. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Quite good, sometimes the lecture slides spent a little too much time on explaining a basic concept. For example, it probably isn't necessary to repeatedly explain a loop iterating 5 times until the end of the loop. But otherwise the course cleared up a few things that I was having a hard time wrapping my head around with a different crash course I took in another class. | that I was having a hard | Time | wrapping my head around with a | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | You won't snooze, this I can promise. Professor Charles does everything one possibly can to make the lectures interesting and still manages who get across all the important stuff. It was a great learning experience for me. It's especially good if you don't have a lot of time to learn this language. | you don't have a lot of | Time | to learn this language. | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | awesome lecturer and content thnx for your time!!!! | lecturer and content thnx for your | Time | ! ! ! | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is fun and challenging at the same time. I have shared this already with my co-faculty and students, hoping they'll have the same experience as I had. | fun and challenging at the same | Time | I have shared this already with | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a well-introduced course for all ages and professions. With the modern world expanding and discoveries made every day, its important that people understand some form of computer science or programming. The teacher, Charles Severance, stresses this point as this course is ONLY centered toward future programmers or rather as common people and professions from astronauts to bankers through a variety of puns, jokes, and fun music. Overall, this course is very helpful and impactful, as the instruction is very thorough and simple with LITTLE AMOUNTS OF TIME REQUIRED. By the end of this course, one with completely no background with programming should be sufficient in creating his or her own program. | and simple with LITTLE AMOUNTS OF | Time | REQUIRED. By the end of this | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A very well-structured course, aimed at those without prior programming experience. Dr. Chuck takes the time and proper care to explain all the basic concepts thoroughly. This serves as a great way to get your feet wet with Python! | programming experience. Dr. Chuck takes the | Time | and proper care to explain all | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I appreciate the time the instructor brought to this class to make it an enjoyable experience. | I appreciate the | Time | the instructor brought to this class | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A great investment of my time to learn some basics of the Python programming language, as well as experiencing some high-quality education on the Coursera platform. I am a higher education professor and administrator of online education. Well done, Dr. Chuck. | A great investment of my | Time | to learn some basics of the | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great, educational course with clear instructions, well written material. You learn a lot in a very short time! | a lot in a very short | Time | | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | A good introductory course. Quite 'easy' but an excellent primer for what comes later. Giving 5 stars as could run lectures at 1.5 speed / pause at appropriate times. Most importantly I did not need to conform to the advised weeks and could just do at own pace. So very convenient. | 5 speed / pause at appropriate | Time | Most importantly I did not need | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent teaching with good pacing. I've had many false starts with learning Python (and programming in general) but this was the first time I've gotten this far! | general) but this was the first | Time | I've gotten this far! | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great overview - went over things many times but patiently and slowly. I have taken a few intro to programming classes and this was one of the easier to follow and understand ones I've experienced. | overview - went over things many | Time | but patiently and slowly. I have | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good class for beginners, easy to understand and challenging at the same time. | understand and challenging at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | To be honest, I thought the course stumbled and fell short. It was too basic and slow paced. The tone was a bit immature at times, and perhaps appropriate only for a grade school level classroom--not something for working professionals. And it's certainly not mature enough or challenging enough for a university class. Even if the goal were to teach those with no programming experience, it could accomplish that while providing more content, and making the content relevant. Is the course worth the price? Hell no. If you do pay, you may feel very cheated at the end. The entire course can be reduced to 3 pages of notes. One would be better off checking into other free, online tutorials. I'm not sure about the value of the videos titled "Office Hours." They all appeared as self-promotional behavior from the professor, as if to say, "hey look how great I am making this video in Paris." They're really nothing more than that. In one video, he corners a guest speaker at a conference, who appears annoyed after a few minutes and gives the professor a polite brush-off: "other people here would like to talk with me too." After all of these videos, you will ask yourself, "okay, why did Severance make me watch that?" "What was the point?" And you'll shrug your shoulders and say, "another waste of time." | tone was a bit immature at | Time | and perhaps appropriate only for a | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | To be honest, I thought the course stumbled and fell short. It was too basic and slow paced. The tone was a bit immature at times, and perhaps appropriate only for a grade school level classroom--not something for working professionals. And it's certainly not mature enough or challenging enough for a university class. Even if the goal were to teach those with no programming experience, it could accomplish that while providing more content, and making the content relevant. Is the course worth the price? Hell no. If you do pay, you may feel very cheated at the end. The entire course can be reduced to 3 pages of notes. One would be better off checking into other free, online tutorials. I'm not sure about the value of the videos titled "Office Hours." They all appeared as self-promotional behavior from the professor, as if to say, "hey look how great I am making this video in Paris." They're really nothing more than that. In one video, he corners a guest speaker at a conference, who appears annoyed after a few minutes and gives the professor a polite brush-off: "other people here would like to talk with me too." After all of these videos, you will ask yourself, "okay, why did Severance make me watch that?" "What was the point?" And you'll shrug your shoulders and say, "another waste of time." | and say, " another waste of | Time | " | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good course, a student can catch all necessary skills within the short period of time, thank the awesome professor and the brilliant textbook. | skills within the short period of | Time | thank the awesome professor and the | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent course for anyone programming for the first time. Clear and simple explanations. | for anyone programming for the first | Time | Clear and simple explanations. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Brilliant course, Professor Chuck is awesome. The amount of time he takes explaining the concepts is remarkable and the assignments and quizzes makes great sense. | Chuck is awesome. The amount of | Time | he takes explaining the concepts is | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Took this as "Programming for Everybody"--my very first programming class. Loved it. It was hard from time to time, but well worth it. It's not likely I will do programming for a living, but understanding this medium makes a big difference for me when I encounter issues related to technology, data and the web. I believe everyone can benefit from some exposure to the world of programming. And this is by far the best course offered online. | Loved it. It was hard from | Time | to time, but well worth it. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Took this as "Programming for Everybody"--my very first programming class. Loved it. It was hard from time to time, but well worth it. It's not likely I will do programming for a living, but understanding this medium makes a big difference for me when I encounter issues related to technology, data and the web. I believe everyone can benefit from some exposure to the world of programming. And this is by far the best course offered online. | It was hard from time to | Time | but well worth it. It's not | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | It does not worth a penny to spend time in this course. | not worth a penny to spend | Time | in this course. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very good introduction. The text is confusing at times, but that's just part of learning new language. | introduction. The text is confusing at | Time | but that's just part of learning | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoy the videos describing the history of the language. The exercises were very good and the 'Office Hours' videos were lots of fun. Its really great to see how many people are interested in Python all around the world. These all provided a good foundation. I also thought it was great to be able to do the exercises and programming problems at any time. I look forward to the second course in this series. | exercises and programming problems at any | Time | I look forward to the second | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very informative, first time programmer friendly and exceptionally entertaining too. | Very informative, first | Time | programmer friendly and exceptionally entertaining too. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I never thought to be able programing on Python so quickly (2 weeks). Each lecture is very clear, indications are very useful no waste of time... at the end: no regrets. Thank you Dr Severance and Coursera to give me this chance! | are very useful no waste of | Time | . . at the end: no | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is for people with little programming background. It is really helpful and interesting. Prof is extremely funny and responsible at the same time. like it very much. | funny and responsible at the same | Time | like it very much. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The Professor really explain evey steps clearly in an very interesting way. I'd love to take the rest of course. Just why they start at the same time ... | why they start at the same | Time | . . . | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course to start programming and learning Python. Dr. Chuck is a very smart teacher. His lessons are interesting, usefull, clear and funny at the same time. | clear and funny at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course. I had previous knowledge of Python, so I found it a bit slow at times, but I can't fault the course for that. I expect anyone seeing this stuff for the first time (especially if they aren't very math oriented) will appreciate the slower pace | found it a bit slow at | Time | but I can't fault the course | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course. I had previous knowledge of Python, so I found it a bit slow at times, but I can't fault the course for that. I expect anyone seeing this stuff for the first time (especially if they aren't very math oriented) will appreciate the slower pace | seeing this stuff for the first | Time | (especially if they aren't very math | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This introductory course to the Python programming language boosted my confidence in my ability to learn programming for data analysis. Without any prior background in programming and just a bit of algebra several years ago in college, I was able to make it through this course fairly easily. The time estimate for each week accurately reflected the amount of time required for me to complete an assignment. After completing this first course in the Specialization, I decided to sign-up for the entire five-course series. | through this course fairly easily. The | Time | estimate for each week accurately reflected | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This introductory course to the Python programming language boosted my confidence in my ability to learn programming for data analysis. Without any prior background in programming and just a bit of algebra several years ago in college, I was able to make it through this course fairly easily. The time estimate for each week accurately reflected the amount of time required for me to complete an assignment. After completing this first course in the Specialization, I decided to sign-up for the entire five-course series. | week accurately reflected the amount of | Time | required for me to complete an | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Outstanding Course for a newby. All about programming. Lectures and problems are clear and relate directly to the subject not related topics like statistics and other disciplines which add nothing to the Python and Python programming focus. Dr. Severance has built a great specialization here. Problems can be challenging but doable within the time frame represented by the course description (give or take a couple hours on some of the more challenging ones. I've learned alot! Thanks | be challenging but doable within the | Time | frame represented by the course description | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed this course, this was my first time learning proper programming and it was taught as well as it is possible to do online. I am really the fan of in-browser python simulator. Big thanks to people behind it. | this course, this was my first | Time | learning proper programming and it was | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Completely worth the time I invested in this course. Clear and to the point instruction with practical assignments. I feel I really learned something through this. It was my first experience with Coursera, thanks to Dr. Charles and the support team of mentors and classmates. I ended up purchasing the certification and am continuing my studies with Coursera. | Completely worth the | Time | I invested in this course. Clear | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I took the first two classes last year when I was trying out coursera. Now that I really want to pursue a python certificate, I'm going for all the classes this time. I highly recommend this class if you're new to python. | going for all the classes this | Time | I highly recommend this class if | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | All of the review I've read were that the course was great, so maybe it is me that was the problem. However, as I would go through the written material, I would try to work the problems given as examples, and when they did not work, I was confused and wondered why the example given to teach us would not work. I asked for help a number of times, providing screen shots of the results I got trying to duplicate what the example was supposed to show, and page numbers of where the example was presented in the course materials. One former student basically said that I should not be trying to duplicate the examples, but just accept the concept they were trying to show. Another did a good job of explaining one of my questions, but then all replies to my question ceased. I decide to drop out of the class and try teaching myself, as I have done on everything I have learned about computers since my 1st computer in 1983. I have been very impressed with other courses given by Coursera members, but this one was not one of them. All of the other submissions praise the course, so maybe it is just me, but none of the other submissions mentioned any actual things the course had done - just that it was great. | asked for help a number of | Time | providing screen shots of the results | Positive | 0.72 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really liked this course but I think it was too soft, I mean, I think we spent a lot of time talking about of algorithmia like loops and so on, and these concepts are universal to all programming languages. Instead of it, we could spend more time, talking about python syntax. Nonetheless I enjoied learn python with you. | think we spent a lot of | Time | talking about of algorithmia like loops | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really liked this course but I think it was too soft, I mean, I think we spent a lot of time talking about of algorithmia like loops and so on, and these concepts are universal to all programming languages. Instead of it, we could spend more time, talking about python syntax. Nonetheless I enjoied learn python with you. | of it, we could spend more | Time | talking about python syntax. Nonetheless I | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great class, I really enjoyed it. Thank you for taking the time to make such a good program for everyone to use. I cant wait to start the next course. | it. Thank you for taking the | Time | to make such a good program | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Best professor and amazing course. Need to make people work more. Assignments are interesting. Include more than 2 assignments as people taking online courses don't get time to work on their own. | people taking online courses don't get | Time | to work on their own. | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Although, this was my first time with python, I was up and running with a few basic codes in as few as two classes. The instructor is amazing and I enjoyed this course. Thank you Prof. Severance and the Coursera team. | Although, this was my first | Time | with python, I was up and | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | It is a really passionate course. For the first time here in coursera I'm really motivate to finish it all (weel, I've tried few courses). Congrats to all people from this course, specially Mr Severance. Thank you! | really passionate course. For the first | Time | here in coursera I'm really motivate | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Had to make this course more than one time due to agenda conflict. However it is by far the best course for those who wants to start learning about programming. If you are a beginner, this is where you want to start! | make this course more than one | Time | due to agenda conflict. However it | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I joined this course to start learning Python. Although I know how to write code in other script languages (Not a full time programmer) I decided to start from the beginning so I won't miss syntax differences. I'm really glad I did take this course because although the main subjects were familiar to me I learned a lot about how to approach Python and some of the syntax differences it has compared to other languages I know. I'm now going to start the next course in this series! | other script languages (Not a full | Time | programmer) I decided to start from | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really had good time learning this course. And this course instructor Charles Severance gave amazing details and intro towards programming, many lecturers just go with direct definitions and concepts present in some textbook but don't go with simplicity. Many new students need something that is simple and clear so I think sir Charles is best in doing that and hes my favourite lecturer now. If the courses are this fun and interesting I wouldn't mind paying for it. | I really had good | Time | learning this course. And this course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Really helpful informative and interesting course. Much good info ant very interesting lectures. Thanks for your time ! | very interesting lectures. Thanks for your | Time | ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Loved learning from Charles Severance. Really felt like I learned the fundamentals of Python AND programming at the same time. Learned a lot about computational thinking and OOP which I can apply to Java and other languages. | Python AND programming at the same | Time | Learned a lot about computational thinking | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Well developed, very clear and fast movement at the same time. Good exercises to practice. The method of teaching is encouraging and not boring at all. | and fast movement at the same | Time | Good exercises to practice. The method | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | i am really in love by the way they teach the method for teaching is so perfect by taking quiz ,assinments and all that helps students to know about himself/herself. and the bonus videos of interviews of great founders and CEO's inspire students to do something more creative for the next time and most important student's saturated notes. they helped you out to clear your concepts more precise so my advice to all newcomers is to take a brief look on notes. and also Dr. Charles Severance and his team deserves a hats-off for his hard-work. love this course....thanks | something more creative for the next | Time | and most important student's saturated notes. | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | An good introduction to Python geared towards people without programming experience. If you already have a good programming experience the only interesting thing of interest will be the syntax, but that's just a fraction of the video's time. You will probably start skipping forward on the basic ideas of how computers work and lessons will take just the time to listen to the videos and you probably will be able to finish a couple of lessons in one evening, instead of a week. I really appreciated the extra videos that give some background on the history behind programming. At the end of this course you will have a basic idea of how a computer works and how you can instruct it to do still very basic things. | just a fraction of the video's | Time | You will probably start skipping forward | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | An good introduction to Python geared towards people without programming experience. If you already have a good programming experience the only interesting thing of interest will be the syntax, but that's just a fraction of the video's time. You will probably start skipping forward on the basic ideas of how computers work and lessons will take just the time to listen to the videos and you probably will be able to finish a couple of lessons in one evening, instead of a week. I really appreciated the extra videos that give some background on the history behind programming. At the end of this course you will have a basic idea of how a computer works and how you can instruct it to do still very basic things. | and lessons will take just the | Time | to listen to the videos and | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | There is some good material but the presentation seems a bit uneven; some parts are repeated many times at very slow speed while other parts, equally important, barely rate a word. The quizzes can be very searching and you really need to have paid close attention to every word (however quickly or slowly it passed by). I would have liked more practical exercises. The accompanying book is good and I am still looking forward to the other courses in the sequence which move further away from my limited knowledge of Python. | uneven; some parts are repeated many | Time | at very slow speed while other | Positive | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a perfect one for people who are beginning to take their first steps in the world of Python (and programming, in general).. All the lectures, assignments, and the course materials offer quite good insight to basic and fundamental programming concepts.. And, considering the syntactical ease of Python, it makes programming easy to learn and understand, removing the extra clutter found in the more traditional languages like C/C++ or Java,, And, finally, the instructor, Prof. Charles Severance, who is more affectionately called Dr. Chuck just mixes fun and learning to create quite an exciting and memorable teaching environment, But, while all of this good, I felt that this course lacked the bite for a more advanced learner or someone who has spent sometime in the world of programming.. The complexity of the quizzes or the assignments are at beginner level... Best for complete beginners.. But, like i mentioned earlier, it is very easy to rush the whole course in a couple of days time or at most, one week for an advanced learner. This course lays the foundation for the more advanced courses in Python.. Technically, it is the first part of the Programming for Everybody specialization, which consists of 5 courses, revolving around the world of Python.. So, my final advice to all beginners is to take their sweet time understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts,, These form the foundation stone for any programming language as well as Computer Science world. Don't worry about the assignments, you will get more than ample time to complete them and succeed in them.. Plus, I feel that you will also enjoy some of the bonus interviews.. They could be quite motivating or thought-provoking.. And, for advanced beginners, you can rush through this course and brush up on some basic concepts to move into more advanced courses, which will not only be a lot more challenging and catering more advanced and diverse concepts and topics.. And, in my opinion, this specialization package could be, at this current moment, the best possible experience when compared to learning the basics of Python online.. And, could be the closest thing to a face-to-face learning experience.. | course in a couple of days | Time | or at most, one week for | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a perfect one for people who are beginning to take their first steps in the world of Python (and programming, in general).. All the lectures, assignments, and the course materials offer quite good insight to basic and fundamental programming concepts.. And, considering the syntactical ease of Python, it makes programming easy to learn and understand, removing the extra clutter found in the more traditional languages like C/C++ or Java,, And, finally, the instructor, Prof. Charles Severance, who is more affectionately called Dr. Chuck just mixes fun and learning to create quite an exciting and memorable teaching environment, But, while all of this good, I felt that this course lacked the bite for a more advanced learner or someone who has spent sometime in the world of programming.. The complexity of the quizzes or the assignments are at beginner level... Best for complete beginners.. But, like i mentioned earlier, it is very easy to rush the whole course in a couple of days time or at most, one week for an advanced learner. This course lays the foundation for the more advanced courses in Python.. Technically, it is the first part of the Programming for Everybody specialization, which consists of 5 courses, revolving around the world of Python.. So, my final advice to all beginners is to take their sweet time understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts,, These form the foundation stone for any programming language as well as Computer Science world. Don't worry about the assignments, you will get more than ample time to complete them and succeed in them.. Plus, I feel that you will also enjoy some of the bonus interviews.. They could be quite motivating or thought-provoking.. And, for advanced beginners, you can rush through this course and brush up on some basic concepts to move into more advanced courses, which will not only be a lot more challenging and catering more advanced and diverse concepts and topics.. And, in my opinion, this specialization package could be, at this current moment, the best possible experience when compared to learning the basics of Python online.. And, could be the closest thing to a face-to-face learning experience.. | beginners is to take their sweet | Time | understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts, | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a perfect one for people who are beginning to take their first steps in the world of Python (and programming, in general).. All the lectures, assignments, and the course materials offer quite good insight to basic and fundamental programming concepts.. And, considering the syntactical ease of Python, it makes programming easy to learn and understand, removing the extra clutter found in the more traditional languages like C/C++ or Java,, And, finally, the instructor, Prof. Charles Severance, who is more affectionately called Dr. Chuck just mixes fun and learning to create quite an exciting and memorable teaching environment, But, while all of this good, I felt that this course lacked the bite for a more advanced learner or someone who has spent sometime in the world of programming.. The complexity of the quizzes or the assignments are at beginner level... Best for complete beginners.. But, like i mentioned earlier, it is very easy to rush the whole course in a couple of days time or at most, one week for an advanced learner. This course lays the foundation for the more advanced courses in Python.. Technically, it is the first part of the Programming for Everybody specialization, which consists of 5 courses, revolving around the world of Python.. So, my final advice to all beginners is to take their sweet time understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts,, These form the foundation stone for any programming language as well as Computer Science world. Don't worry about the assignments, you will get more than ample time to complete them and succeed in them.. Plus, I feel that you will also enjoy some of the bonus interviews.. They could be quite motivating or thought-provoking.. And, for advanced beginners, you can rush through this course and brush up on some basic concepts to move into more advanced courses, which will not only be a lot more challenging and catering more advanced and diverse concepts and topics.. And, in my opinion, this specialization package could be, at this current moment, the best possible experience when compared to learning the basics of Python online.. And, could be the closest thing to a face-to-face learning experience.. | you will get more than ample | Time | to complete them and succeed in | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | this is very nice course, it will not take long time per week , you can do it while working or studying something else with ease, and professor chuck is really good to make you interested in the whole course, I really loved this course | course, it will not take long | Time | per week , you can do | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Wonderful course. Gradually gets more challenging. Take your time, and listen w | Gradually gets more challenging. Take your | Time | and listen w | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed my time with this online experience. Though I managed to get thru most of the course without having to post a question, I did realize in the end how easy and responsive the course TA's are in follow up. And there is also the community of other students whom I was able to learn from in seeing their questions and answer sessions. You have no idea how important it was for me to be able to review the material in snippets in my day and then review it again and again so that I could comprehend the nuances of the lessons. Amazing, I wish I had this when I was in my undergrad days. | I really enjoyed my | Time | with this online experience. Though I | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | too easy, save us us much time to learn it. beside this, it is also a good experience because it has many bonus about the background of the development of Python. | too easy, save us us much | Time | to learn it. beside this, it | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Chuck is great! At times, the course was a little slow-moving, but that does keep everyone on the same page. Everything is explained in full detail and well. | Dr. Chuck is great! At | Time | the course was a little slow-moving, | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Like the style of the professor and his really cool tea cup :P . Good start for any one. First time ever completed a coursera course . Cheers for me :) | Good start for any one. First | Time | ever completed a coursera course . | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Had a very nice time learning Python and got a lot out of this course. Would definitely recommend for beginners. | Had a very nice | Time | learning Python and got a lot | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | It was a great course. I had all the time in the world to finish this course the instructors are really co-operative. | great course. I had all the | Time | in the world to finish this | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Programming makes sense to me now. The course material is well thought out and progresses in a way that allows for full understanding of how the language works. I have tried learning Python, C++, and Java from other sources; this is the first time I feel I have been successful. I want't to learn more! | other sources; this is the first | Time | I feel I have been successful. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Chuck makes the course quite simple. At the beginning of the course, he patiently introduces some preparing steps such as python installation and screenshot tools, which is quite useful for students with little computer knowledge. During the course, Dr. Chuck manages to use the simplest language to explain the concepts. The slides use different colors to differentiate different elements in a script, indicating Dr. Chuck's consideration for the students. The course reminds me of the sentence from The Zen of Python, "simple is better than complex." The course is a beginning course for python. I studied Visual Basic in my freshman year, and now, three years after VB, I found the assignments quite easy. So I advise that if you have prior knowledge of other languages, you can use the book provided by Dr. Chuck to quickly understand the concepts and view some example code. Then you can directly jump to the assignments and I suppose that it would not be too hard for you. I heard MOOC one year ago and enrolled several courses at Coursera. However, this is my first finished course. Sometimes the network speed of the school was too slow to view the videos and this really slowed me down. I also had some school work and exams. Now I am at the end of my undergraduate study and have enough time to take MOOCs. $310 is quite expensive for me but I hope I can accomplish the five courses of this specialization and some day I'll come back to pay for the certification. Thanks to Dr. Chuck and mentors. Tao.Zheng Huazhong University of Science&Technology, P.R.China | my undergraduate study and have enough | Time | to take MOOCs. $310 is quite | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | pretty good course for 1st timers, but spending more time on showing how to draw flow charts may be better | for 1st timers, but spending more | Time | on showing how to draw flow | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is too simplistic in my opinion. The entire 7 week course should be condensed into the first week - a single one hour lesson. Still, I appreciate the time and effort of the course staff and thank them for providing the course. | hour lesson. Still, I appreciate the | Time | and effort of the course staff | Positive | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Fantastic course, Well structured and to the point and informative. I didnt know anything about python before this course, now i have a full grasp of how powerful python can be and i have an understanding of the language. Thank you for putting in the time and effort into this course. | Thank you for putting in the | Time | and effort into this course. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | i have to say its a wonderful course, i am just one that desire to learn something new and interesting and the professor Charles Severance, its so great, he is wonderful teaching python even make laugh one time or two, its a wonderful course really :) | teaching python even make laugh one | Time | or two, its a wonderful course | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great instructor, perfect for first time programmers. | Great instructor, perfect for first | Time | programmers. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I have tried other open course sites for learning Python and found this one the best. Charles Severance teaches in a simple, straight forward, easy to understand way that is entertaining as well. I feel I have learned more from him in a shorter period of time than other avenues I've tried. This course is a great way to learn Python! | him in a shorter period of | Time | than other avenues I've tried. This | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | very fundamental, but the instructor is tiresomely talkative...for example, when he talked about examples, he compared each two numbers again and again, what I want to is the logic to find the max/min number, not 49 is larger than 9!!!everyone knows it !! he compared every number every time ....it is boring!!! I will not choose this course if there are other python courses open at this time!! | ! he compared every number every | Time | . . . . it is | Positive | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | very fundamental, but the instructor is tiresomely talkative...for example, when he talked about examples, he compared each two numbers again and again, what I want to is the logic to find the max/min number, not 49 is larger than 9!!!everyone knows it !! he compared every number every time ....it is boring!!! I will not choose this course if there are other python courses open at this time!! | other python courses open at this | Time | ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is a great course!! It moves a good pace and allows those with full time job to continue to learn and sharpen their skills. I love the material that they make available to the students, it is very helpful! | pace and allows those with full | Time | job to continue to learn and | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I've started and failed to finish, even after two weeks, many on-line MOOCs and thought maybe it wasn't my style. This one has given me hope I can set up an environment and participate in a class that goes at a reasonable pace. I enjoy the teaching style and that the lectures are designed for people without a lot of (if any) CS or computing background, which is great for me. I come from the biology field and always wanted to learn programming but never gave it enough time or effort. This class has helped me come a long way from quitting course after course, to now believe that I can finish an entire on line class because it is meeting me at my level. | programming but never gave it enough | Time | or effort. This class has helped | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very well structured and time limits are more than reasonable. | Very well structured and | Time | limits are more than reasonable. | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | First time taking a programming course. I was able to understand the basic concepts of python codding and I am looking forward to the next course Python Data Structures. I hope to get a better understanding on how to apply python to real world situations when I conclude all the courses available. I am very excited. Thanks Prof Chuck and CTA's. | First | Time | taking a programming course. I was | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The initial topics and concepts are very well explained, which helps to build a solid foundation for learning future advanced programming techniques. Prof. Charles has taken time to elaborate on basics which can be easily grasped by complete beginners. The language and pace of course is easy and the lessons are peppered with lot of examples and video interviews of industry experts. | programming techniques. Prof. Charles has taken | Time | to elaborate on basics which can | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | For beginners in programming is very good. For someone who have some experience with other programming languages, this first course is too much easy but has interesting things (interviews, etc.) anyway so it is not a waste of time even for then. | it is not a waste of | Time | even for then. | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great starter course. Was challenging at times as I started with a book on python 3 and this course covers 2.7, but overall very well done. | Great starter course. Was challenging at | Time | as I started with a book | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Love this course. Was previously using only Codeacademy (which is a great program also), however, as a "first time programmer" I found the basics very difficult to understand. This is really rounding out my understanding and I love your vision for accessible education. | also), however, as a " first | Time | programmer" I found the basics very | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is THE best course for beginners. I love the way Dr. Chuck has taught Python programming. His lectures are very interesting and easy to understand and the entire course has been a lot of fun with all its quizzes and programming assignments. His book is as great as are his lectures. I am looking forward to learning more about python through his courses. This is just the type of course that I was wanting to do for some time and I am lucky I found this through Coursera! Thank you Dr. Chuck! | was wanting to do for some | Time | and I am lucky I found | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent course. Just the right amount of work and time for an intro course. 10/10 would recommend to anyone. | the right amount of work and | Time | for an intro course. 10/10 would | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed this course, and found it easy to keep up with the projects by setting aside one day a week. I find that the lectures move a little slowly, but simply speeding up the video time made it feel much more efficient. Following along with the e-book, I felt confident going through each of the exercises, and had a lot of fun while banging my head against the keyboard trying to figure out how to make things work (due to my own errors, not problems within the course). I'm looking forward to the next class! | but simply speeding up the video | Time | made it feel much more efficient. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I loved this class! It was challenging but didn't take over my life (I have a full time job), and I think I got a good handle on the basics. The professor is really entertaining and is great at teaching. I definitely recommend this to someone trying to get an introduction to programming. | my life (I have a full | Time | job), and I think I got | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This was a great intro for anyone who has never programmed and very well articulated. Concepts clearly explained. Giving it 5 stars since the effort that has gone into making these videos is poorly understood by people who have not been in lecturing positions - I salute you ! Having been a self taught programmer from the mid 80's on BASIC with Apple 2E's, it is a breath of fresh air seeing this kind of material on the Internet. I had to dig around in libraries which had books (yes paper!). If the youth could rather spend time exploiting this fountain of knowledge instead of hacking away on FPS and Online gaming then we could see some really cool stuff happen :). | If the youth could rather spend | Time | exploiting this fountain of knowledge instead | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The teaching methodology was superb!! It worth spending time in his lecture.Hope to have some advance study soon in Python which shall be freely available to learners who keen to learn something new but cannot afford the tuition fee. . | was superb! ! It worth spending | Time | in his lecture. Hope to have | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good introduction to Python. Examples and assignments were just what I needed to get a jumpstart. Professor has an amazing and funny teaching style (if you're someone from the coding industry), helps chill out and relax and learn at the same time !! Thank you very much !! Can't believe it's all free ... | relax and learn at the same | Time | ! ! Thank you very much | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I'm very glad I enrolled dr.Chuck courses - they're not too simple, not too hard for the first time. You're need something interesting for the begining. Something that will remind you that learning is interesting. Dr.Chuck courses damn fit for this purpose. Thank you, dr.Chuck, Teaching staff of University of Michigan and Coursera. | not too hard for the first | Time | You're need something interesting for the | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Professor Severence makes the class fun and interesting. The book is free and the material is chunked in a logical manner that makes it easy to follow along each week. Great pace for anyone who also has a full time job. | anyone who also has a full | Time | job. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is fantastic! Even though you have never heard about programming. The professor is awesome and really clear in his explanations. It seems to me like a real time lecture: whatever is my question, he answers it on the very next minute! :) | seems to me like a real | Time | lecture: whatever is my question, he | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I am very disappointed with this programming course. The course lacks detail and deepth and could be taught in 45 to 60 minutes instead of 7 weeks. The quizzes and assignments were to easy and basic (solved in less than 5 minutes) and definitely not enough. Annoying was the overuse of colours in almost every video (almost everything was coloured - highlighting everything is just as usefull as highlighting nothing, green box with white text inside - did you try to read that on a different monitor than yours?), the pointless and useless doodles, smilies and whatsoever, wasting my time by watching you dispose your teabag/drinking tea or coffee/talking about your mug/etc., why do you even need to drink in a 20 minute-or-less video. The Tutor tried to loosen a dry topic. Mostly it wasn't my humor but I can live with that. I had hoped for more :( | doodles, smilies and whatsoever, wasting my | Time | by watching you dispose your teabag/drinking | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I enjoyed this course. Thank you, Mr. Charles Severance for elaborate teaching and for making the sessions interesting with all the questions asked and time given for students to pause - think and continue. Since I had prior experience in programming I found it easy to clear this course. I will be enrolling for the next course in Python offered by you. This is my first Coursera course and I am impressed! | with all the questions asked and | Time | given for students to pause - | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I have tried various online courses before though i couldn't complete anything on time. This course takes the least amount of time and gives you a comprehensive introduction to Python. It has everything which a completely new person to programming needs. | though i couldn't complete anything on | Time | This course takes the least amount | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I have tried various online courses before though i couldn't complete anything on time. This course takes the least amount of time and gives you a comprehensive introduction to Python. It has everything which a completely new person to programming needs. | course takes the least amount of | Time | and gives you a comprehensive introduction | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great Python Course for beginners. I wish we had Coursera when I was first learning programming. I am not new to programming but I still found the course very useful to get a head-start with Python language. All credits to Charles to keep the course interesting, informative and at the same time very simple to understand. I would highly recommend this course to anyone new to programming (any language) and Python beginners. Kudos to Prof. Charles and Coursera community for an amazing experience! Best, Suruchi | interesting, informative and at the same | Time | very simple to understand. I would | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Managed to complete this in 2 weeks as I have quite a lot of time available. The exercises were fairly simple and easy to understand giving me a good grounding in the basics of python. | I have quite a lot of | Time | available. The exercises were fairly simple | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really like the way this course is presented, fun and light hearted but at the same time feel encouraged to do my best. Thank you so much to everyone who made this course posable. | light hearted but at the same | Time | feel encouraged to do my best. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Charles Severance is an awesome online teacher. Learning Python this way is easy and fun and the same time. Thank you so much for this course. | easy and fun and the same | Time | Thank you so much for this | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is perfect for an absolute newbie like me. It guides you through but at the same time teaches you to think for yourself. | you through but at the same | Time | teaches you to think for yourself. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Difficult to understand the video lectures at time but really useful content. Excellent further reading sections at the end of each module. | to understand the video lectures at | Time | but really useful content. Excellent further | Positive | 0.63 | 3.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It was a wonderful experience of taking such a valuable course from a well qualified instructor, presentation was great, detailed and well understood. Thank you again for your time, effort and being the great contributor of this type of education. Many thanks again. | understood. Thank you again for your | Time | effort and being the great contributor | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | this course is great in concept. but the reality was disappointing and will have to improve. the professor gave lots of links to interesting external materials. but his prepared lectures were much briefer and consisted mostly of presenting bullet-point lists. as a result, i found myself studying just to pass the quizes and not to actually enhance my knowledge. :( given the high standard of the other courses in this specialization, i'm sure it will be better next time.... | sure it will be better next | Time | . . . | Negative | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | lecture too focus on the theory that not very useful on business world. The BI tool "microStrategy" used in the homework is too slow and crash from time to time. | is too slow and crash from | Time | to time. | Negative | 0.84 | 1.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | lecture too focus on the theory that not very useful on business world. The BI tool "microStrategy" used in the homework is too slow and crash from time to time. | slow and crash from time to | Time | | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| 7gLccRnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It is a really good and well structured course. Initially, I felt the structure is not making me think but when I reached the end, in summative project, I realized how much I have learned. Anyone with basic IT background would be comfortable with the course. Learned various concepts of Business Intelligence; and microstrategy as a BI tool is good for analyzing. After I am done, I am going to spend more time looking at other tools of Microstrategy and apply those in the capstone course if required. I came across some students facing issues with microstrategy in the Discussion forum but I think improper installation or hardware and software support could be the cause. Thank You, Mr. Karimi. | I am going to spend more | Time | looking at other tools of Microstrategy | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 7Iw3cbCiEeS-qCIACimRTw | A complete Mindset changing for me. I‘m taking this course for the second time and already shared what I see here with all my colleagues and friends. | taking this course for the second | Time | and already shared what I see | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| 7Iw3cbCiEeS-qCIACimRTw | The course was very well presented. The only bother is the peer review can take quite a long time and I had completed the course well in advance of having "officially" finished. | review can take quite a long | Time | and I had completed the course | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 7jEat7ioEeWfYA612mWHZw | Well matured course that provides a great digest over a very complex topic and is a fantastic gateway to get started on the topic. Don't expect a terribly engaging set of presentations, but it is factually very useful and worth the time for those relatively new to the subject. I found the amount of content easy to handle on the side, while working full time. | factually very useful and worth the | Time | for those relatively new to the | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 7jEat7ioEeWfYA612mWHZw | Well matured course that provides a great digest over a very complex topic and is a fantastic gateway to get started on the topic. Don't expect a terribly engaging set of presentations, but it is factually very useful and worth the time for those relatively new to the subject. I found the amount of content easy to handle on the side, while working full time. | on the side, while working full | Time | | Positive | 0.74 | 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. | slides seem to be un-organised at | Time | with repeating information, making them confusing. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 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. | could be done better with more | Time | spent preparing and recording the videos. | Negative | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | Very good and informative, the instructors are apparently new to teach in front of a camera, they will be better in time. I look forward to an advanced course from the same team. | camera, they will be better in | Time | I look forward to an advanced | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | It's globally a nice course, although you have to keep in mind that it is more like an introduction to the topic rather than a real, full course. I was quite frustrated from time to time that some important and difficult points are not really justified or explained in details, but just given as assumption or obvious concept: If you are familiar with that concept, you will be fine (but probably won't learn that much), while if you are not you will be probably lost. I mean, for a free course this is already a pretty nice job, and I think it is worth to take this course. I would be for sure ready to pay something to get a longer and more detailed course on this topic. | course. I was quite frustrated from | Time | to time that some important and | Positive | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| 7O843CBJEeWcQw5YiljpGw | It's globally a nice course, although you have to keep in mind that it is more like an introduction to the topic rather than a real, full course. I was quite frustrated from time to time that some important and difficult points are not really justified or explained in details, but just given as assumption or obvious concept: If you are familiar with that concept, you will be fine (but probably won't learn that much), while if you are not you will be probably lost. I mean, for a free course this is already a pretty nice job, and I think it is worth to take this course. I would be for sure ready to pay something to get a longer and more detailed course on this topic. | was quite frustrated from time to | Time | that some important and difficult points | Positive | 0.64 | 3.0 |
| 7t9y531dEeWKYwric11Hpw | The instructor was hard to understand at times. | instructor was hard to understand at | Time | | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| 7TpL2X3IEeWfrQ7ngHMGEQ | The course is very challenging at time, but the models and formulas are all quite intuitive. Thanks so much! | The course is very challenging at | Time | but the models and formulas are | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| 7vasMEd_EeW8cBKtDAegYw | Although I'm only the first week, there are two main comments I'd like to make. Firstly, why are the lectures sub-divided with the ridiculous, overlong, and irritating introduction for each section. In lesson one, this was repeated 11 times. What a waste of time! Secondly, the transcripts are in rich text, which is basically unreadable, has no line breaks, which makes reading the poems impossible, and the transcripts are poorly transcribed, making them illiterate. I feel I may not continue with the course for these reasons, even though the content is really interesting. This is the worst presented MOOC I have encountered.....I have completed 6, and am undertaking another 2, with edxcel and with futurelearn | lesson one, this was repeated 11 | Time | What a waste of time! Secondly, | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 7vasMEd_EeW8cBKtDAegYw | Although I'm only the first week, there are two main comments I'd like to make. Firstly, why are the lectures sub-divided with the ridiculous, overlong, and irritating introduction for each section. In lesson one, this was repeated 11 times. What a waste of time! Secondly, the transcripts are in rich text, which is basically unreadable, has no line breaks, which makes reading the poems impossible, and the transcripts are poorly transcribed, making them illiterate. I feel I may not continue with the course for these reasons, even though the content is really interesting. This is the worst presented MOOC I have encountered.....I have completed 6, and am undertaking another 2, with edxcel and with futurelearn | 11 times. What a waste of | Time | Secondly, the transcripts are in rich | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | I was waiting for a good Private Equity course long time. I find this course very well structured. I give it 5 Stars. | a good Private Equity course long | Time | I find this course very well | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | It's difficult to find university courses that are more hands-on other than theoretical, which is definetely the case with this Private Equity and Venture Capital course. It helped me refresh previous knowledge, while at the same time providing insight into practical matters such as regulation, regional differences as well as | previous knowledge, while at the same | Time | providing insight into practical matters such | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 84pGjiPgEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Exceptional course and amazing professor with deep knowledge of the field and which key concepts he should present in the limited time he has. Thank you! | he should present in the limited | Time | he has. Thank you! | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| 893hvnH8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I thought the course was oldfashioned, it doesn't prepare you to be a journalist in the digital age, where terms like crowdfunding, search ability, new businessmodels, apps and social media are key factors of success. Yes, there was a small section where they explained crowdsourcing (lol) but interviewing as many people as you can seems to be cryptosaurus approach. Also the social media tips seem to be very interesting if you're 65+. It's worth following this course for free but definately not your money, the free course on futurelearn had ten times more content and I learned so much more... | free course on futurelearn had ten | Time | more content and I learned so | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 8cCaMoJkEeWXJRLCDq5sWw | This was a brilliant course that has given me, for the first time, an understanding of the history of and issues in the Middle East. I highly recommend it. | has given me, for the first | Time | an understanding of the history of | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 8cCaMoJkEeWXJRLCDq5sWw | A great course all around, just like Part I. Bitter sweet to be done as there was so much great information in here. I highly recommend both courses if you want to learn a good amount of information on the Middle East in a short period of time. | East in a short period of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 8G7jDCT-EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Some of the videos are really good. Unfortunately I feel there is little actual help to complete a project in the given time. The great thing about this course is the feeling of publishing your own game. That is priceless :) | complete a project in the given | Time | The great thing about this course | Negative | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| 8G7jDCT-EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | It was actually easier/flexible than what I thought. In this course/final project they give you a lot of flexibility and you can create whatever you want in the time given. For example for my self I worked really hard to have a polished product at the end that I could use as portfolio, but I've seen really basic projects while correcting my course mates. And I also saw amazing games with professional designs and even announced in Kickstater. So I guess this course adapts to your level and necessities. | create whatever you want in the | Time | given. For example for my self | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | Obtain awareness and concepts in a short time. Learned a lot ! | awareness and concepts in a short | Time | Learned a lot ! | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| 8H8wFp3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This was a great course; very good explanations teoretical and practice, you gave us powerful tools to analyze data and took the necesary time for cover the topics. Maybe you can add in the future some exercises that we have to upload for review among each other students. Thank you very much for share this tools and your knowledge. | analyze data and took the necesary | Time | for cover the topics. Maybe you | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 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. | . . " I didn't have | Time | to make the arithmetic easy so | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Well organized body of knowledge on how to build efficient data science team, from 0 to 60. Addresses a number of challenges including how to build an inter-disciplinary team, what to expect from practitioners from different disciplines, how to recognize right candidates, how to assign the right mix of practitioners to right business problems, how to cross-polinate the knowledge, how to keep feedback loops at professional level as it's fraught with potential for conflicting opinions, when to stop analysis, how to empower the team to initiate next iterations with business, common pitfalls and more. Worth every $ and all the time you'll spend on it. | Worth every $ and all the | Time | you'll spend on it. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 8om3I-4LEeSbxyIACw0OOQ | Great course overall. It focuses on functional programming concepts like immutability, locally-defined functions, pattern-matching and forces the user to use recursion, taking you out of your for-loop comfort zone. In my humble opinion, maybe the time spent in learning the SML language, which is not the main goal of the course, takes a bit too long, but on the other hand I guess that can't really be helped. Videos are grate and grading procedures are pretty fair. Mind you, the course is fairly time-consuming. | In my humble opinion, maybe the | Time | spent in learning the SML language, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 8om3I-4LEeSbxyIACw0OOQ | This is the first time I'm exposed to functional programming and it is amazing. | This is the first | Time | I'm exposed to functional programming and | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Course in not only just about theory of cyber security .But also ,It also accommodates psychological view to cyber world . This makes it more interesting .The brief part of law related to cyber security buttress the content maturity .However, More information on privacy should be added .If done ,course is a 5 star Course .Moreover, every lecture gives information.So, efficiently crafted out of course .Overall,it's worth taking and worth time spending | Overall, it's worth taking and worth | Time | spending | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 8TKORJrSEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | I'm sorry that I'm going to sound harsh, but this course is useless. It touches so many different topics without going deeply into any of them. All you get is a basic knowledge about All Things Cyber™. The recommended readings are all over the place, the video captions look like they're just a basic speech recognition and like nobody actually proof read them. They're full of errors. Lecturers say one word, captions show a completely different word. Plus, they're full of spelling errors. (Kadafi regime in Libya!? Really!?) You can get the same amount of knowledge by reading two or three Wikipedia pages. Don't waste your time on this course. | three Wikipedia pages. Don't waste your | Time | on this course. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | As other reviewers have noted, this course is NOT for beginning programmers! (Unless maybe you are a mathematical genius with total recall.) I have a little background in programming, HTML and CSS, but I found this course to be an absolute nightmare. It would be interesting to find out if any of the rave reviews came from real beginners. Most of the problems have already been noted by other reviews, so I will only mention a few that I did not see mentioned. The course requirements should include hardware and software essentials. In particular, the student has no choice but to use Android Studio. If their system is not running a 64bit OS at 2.4 GHz with at least 8 GB of RAM, it can literally take DAYS for Studio to complete the build so that the student can do anything with assignment code. There is a desperate need for a glossary. The course dives in with more acronyms than the military, and assumes the attmpting learner already has a handle on APIs, SDKs, etc., not to mention many other technical terms (interfaces, ...). If I asked the average programmer to evaluate the MT based on comparisons with the Complutensian Polyglot and Codex Alexandricus, the effect would probably be about the same. Another glaring omission for beginners is a battery of exercises for each concept/skill. As for "We've organized all these topics into units that represent roughly 4-6 hours of work each," that is absurd! If you multiplied that by 10, it would still be a stretch. I have no doubt about the programming and technical competence of the instructors (though there are some errors in a number of the instructions). And I'm sure they are very nice people who really want others to learn. The root problem seems to be what professional communicators call "The Curse of Knowledge" -- a syndrome in which a person is so familiar with their subject that they cannot begin to imagine what it is like for someone who is not. My recommendation to a beginner is to look somewhere else. Take a good introductory course in Java before diving into the vastly more complex world of the Android environment. I am not qualified to evaluate the course from the perspective of an experienced programmer, but I have noted that they are frustrated by clutter caused by token attempts to make this a beginner course. My recommendation to the faculty is to completely re-engineer this whole specialization. They should have a separate set of courses truly designed for beginners, and they should get help from qualified instructional designers who specialize in online adult education. (Might not be a bad idea to get the VU English department to review the lecture text as well.) My recommendation to anyone is to never believe anything Coursera tells you about a course. Audit the course BEFORE you pay any money! This is especially important if the course has not actually started. This course started two months late, and I could not get a refund before the course even got under way! After taking nearly 6 months to wade through a little over half the course requirements, I decided to look at the rest of the assignments and project. This removed all doubt that to continue was a hopeless waste of time. So, I decided to end the nightmare, and I'm glad it's over! | continue was a hopeless waste of | Time | So, I decided to end the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Few thoughts: The very first videos describing Java For Android were containing really too many keywords/concepts, and it might be discouraging for someone new to programmation who just started the class, try to make it less dense. That's my point of view as someone who already had a good programming background. The lessons were okay. However the slides could be really improved and make things concise for someone who is new to Java. Finally I was really disappointed by the assignments. I often spent more time reading and trying to understand a long assignment (which could be reduced to a few lines), than writing the solution. Also, the frequent use of "rand" seems to be leading a lot of people to "almost correct" solutions, and they spend a long time debugging (that's what I understood reading the forums). | the assignments. I often spent more | Time | reading and trying to understand a | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Few thoughts: The very first videos describing Java For Android were containing really too many keywords/concepts, and it might be discouraging for someone new to programmation who just started the class, try to make it less dense. That's my point of view as someone who already had a good programming background. The lessons were okay. However the slides could be really improved and make things concise for someone who is new to Java. Finally I was really disappointed by the assignments. I often spent more time reading and trying to understand a long assignment (which could be reduced to a few lines), than writing the solution. Also, the frequent use of "rand" seems to be leading a lot of people to "almost correct" solutions, and they spend a long time debugging (that's what I understood reading the forums). | solutions, and they spend a long | Time | debugging (that's what I understood reading | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Very very bad communication from the teachers. The 2nd MOOC was supposed to start I think 2.5 months ago, it did not start at the time of this review. They did not even bother to post some announcement to let the students know : ok course starts in x months. Making things worse, you cannot get a refund if you purchased the entire thing. | it did not start at the | Time | of this review. They did not | Negative | 0.92 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It's a good course, but you do need programming experience. Also, takes twice as much time as they say, at least. Also, third week of course has a lot of work, while fourth week has very little. Would be nice to balance them out. I did get a lot out of the course and plan to continue with this specialization. | experience. Also, takes twice as much | Time | as they say, at least. Also, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | First time I gave 1 star. Reason, lecturers are terrible. This deserves a report, if there was adequate reporting system on Coursera. I had a feeling like I was watching professors from school for disabled, and not an university. . . Course material is actually decent, but extremely badly presented. Sadly, I enrolled into second course as well, and hoping that one will be better, so I wont have to go through refund hell. | First | Time | I gave 1 star. Reason, lecturers | Negative | 0.86 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It is told that to take this course, basic computer skills like sending emails and downloading files are necessary-this is a beginning level course. Then, in the first module, instructors talk about polymorphism, inheritance and abstraction. For someone who have no prior programming experience, these are definitely not suitable topics to start with. Moreover, students are supposed to learn these concepts to get a good grade from first quiz, although they know nothing about programming. I had some programming experience, so I was already familiar with these subjects. But the lectures were too boring to keep watching. I watched like 10 videos and learned nothing about the course subject. I think I won't be spending my time for this course, which seems to me like reading some reference files. | think I won't be spending my | Time | for this course, which seems to | Negative | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | quizzes, I took them so many | Time | all the other answers are memorized | Positive | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I feel this course was severely misrepresented. This clearly not a beginner level class by any measurement. And the "4-6 hours" of expected student involvement is ridiculous. A beginner (NO programming experience) should expect to spend 15 to 20 hours on the first week alone and at least 10 hours for each of the remaining weeks. I have over 25 years of programming experience in Assembly language, Visual Basic, C and C++. I am clearly NOT at the beginner level yet I spent more than 11 hours on the first week, mostly due to trying to download and setup properly for the course. Also, there are over 3 hours of videos in the 1st week plus 3 quizzes and a programming assignment. If anyone spent less than 6 hours on week 1, then that was NOT the first time they took this class. I also am keenly disappointed in the restrictive nature of the assignments/quizzes. Having to type "-1*1+11" instead of "-i+11" (and you better not have any leading or lagging spaces!!) for instance. Bottom line, I would not recommend this course for anyone wanting to Learn Java for Android Programming unless you already know Java and just want some intro on Android development with Android Studio. And if you are indeed at the beginner level, do yourself a favor and start with introductory courses in Computer Science. | then that was NOT the first | Time | they took this class. I also | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course. First time enrolled course in Coursera. I really enjoyed it. Lots of quiz and weekly assignment kept me busy for 4 weeks. And because of these ( assignment due date), i really learned by forcing myself to complete all in time. Quite tough on week 3, and i watched the videos multiple times and google the subject in order to understand the contents. Take this course, and struggle for 4 weeks. Will not regret. | Good course. First | Time | enrolled course in Coursera. I really | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course. First time enrolled course in Coursera. I really enjoyed it. Lots of quiz and weekly assignment kept me busy for 4 weeks. And because of these ( assignment due date), i really learned by forcing myself to complete all in time. Quite tough on week 3, and i watched the videos multiple times and google the subject in order to understand the contents. Take this course, and struggle for 4 weeks. Will not regret. | forcing myself to complete all in | Time | Quite tough on week 3, and | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course. First time enrolled course in Coursera. I really enjoyed it. Lots of quiz and weekly assignment kept me busy for 4 weeks. And because of these ( assignment due date), i really learned by forcing myself to complete all in time. Quite tough on week 3, and i watched the videos multiple times and google the subject in order to understand the contents. Take this course, and struggle for 4 weeks. Will not regret. | and i watched the videos multiple | Time | and google the subject in order | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I am relatively experienced programmer trying to just understand the Android app development framework and solve some interesting challenges along the way. I feel the course, was very painstaking in terms of code reviewing other people's work. If I were to break up the time I spent doing the course work, it would be as follows: 30 % useful work 70 % taking care of course logistics (code review, writing comments on every line of code just so that people being asked to review my work are happy). Why do we have to do so many code reviews? Not every assignment requires people's coding style to be evaluated. It places an unnecessary time burden on people who are taking this course not as full time student. Its also reducing the total amount of knowledge that is being disseminated. We should be learning about Android for 4 more hours rather than reviewing code for other people for 4 more hours. The thing I found most frustrating is that the assignments are trying to force a particular coding style on everyone. Since I am an experienced programmer, I understand the importance of coding style, creating functions and all that. However, how I structure my code and how many comments I write are entirely my choice. Now, while I understand that the course material itself does not ask you to structure code one way or another; the review guidelines that are being given to some very inexperienced programmers, makes them believe that this is the only way things should be done. Its a subtle form of style enforcement which I did not appreciate. | I were to break up the | Time | I spent doing the course work, | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I am relatively experienced programmer trying to just understand the Android app development framework and solve some interesting challenges along the way. I feel the course, was very painstaking in terms of code reviewing other people's work. If I were to break up the time I spent doing the course work, it would be as follows: 30 % useful work 70 % taking care of course logistics (code review, writing comments on every line of code just so that people being asked to review my work are happy). Why do we have to do so many code reviews? Not every assignment requires people's coding style to be evaluated. It places an unnecessary time burden on people who are taking this course not as full time student. Its also reducing the total amount of knowledge that is being disseminated. We should be learning about Android for 4 more hours rather than reviewing code for other people for 4 more hours. The thing I found most frustrating is that the assignments are trying to force a particular coding style on everyone. Since I am an experienced programmer, I understand the importance of coding style, creating functions and all that. However, how I structure my code and how many comments I write are entirely my choice. Now, while I understand that the course material itself does not ask you to structure code one way or another; the review guidelines that are being given to some very inexperienced programmers, makes them believe that this is the only way things should be done. Its a subtle form of style enforcement which I did not appreciate. | be evaluated. It places an unnecessary | Time | burden on people who are taking | Negative | 0.72 | 2.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I am relatively experienced programmer trying to just understand the Android app development framework and solve some interesting challenges along the way. I feel the course, was very painstaking in terms of code reviewing other people's work. If I were to break up the time I spent doing the course work, it would be as follows: 30 % useful work 70 % taking care of course logistics (code review, writing comments on every line of code just so that people being asked to review my work are happy). Why do we have to do so many code reviews? Not every assignment requires people's coding style to be evaluated. It places an unnecessary time burden on people who are taking this course not as full time student. Its also reducing the total amount of knowledge that is being disseminated. We should be learning about Android for 4 more hours rather than reviewing code for other people for 4 more hours. The thing I found most frustrating is that the assignments are trying to force a particular coding style on everyone. Since I am an experienced programmer, I understand the importance of coding style, creating functions and all that. However, how I structure my code and how many comments I write are entirely my choice. Now, while I understand that the course material itself does not ask you to structure code one way or another; the review guidelines that are being given to some very inexperienced programmers, makes them believe that this is the only way things should be done. Its a subtle form of style enforcement which I did not appreciate. | taking this course not as full | Time | student. Its also reducing the total | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course!!. the approach is well-balanced (no superficial and at the same time not too much professional). The quiz are done very well. | (no superficial and at the same | Time | not too much professional). The quiz | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Al ot more challenging then i thought. Once i managed my time a bit better it was very engaging | i thought. Once i managed my | Time | a bit better it was very | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | The Assignment questions are unclear due to which a lot of time has to be invested. | due to which a lot of | Time | has to be invested. | Negative | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It's about 4.4 actually. Not enough to give 5 though. First about positive sides. I think course is well structured (except for a few minor drawbacks), quizzes fit to the material. An assignments truly buck up the material. And I think material give a grounding in future Android Development. But I think it can be problem with the learning process, mostly with programming assignment. I think it's common that when course come out for the first time it's almost inevitably that there are some issues with autograder. It' s just common. But these issue are usually easy to spot, because the output of autograder contains test cases. So one can easily find out what the problem is, if it's with autograder. As for this course, the autograder output is very minimalistic, and if the problem is with autograder it's rather hard to spot. I myself spent entire evening, trying to find what is wrong with my code, and it was pure luck that I finely spotted the problem (and, yes, it was autograder issue). Such thing could be very frustrating, really. Another problem with programming assignments is about Peer Review. The students actually get access to assessment criteria, after they have submitted they code. And their code not necessary fit these criteria. I think it could spoil the learning process as well. I actually aware that these drawbacks can be corrected in release course, and if they will be, I will be glad to change the rating. | course come out for the first | Time | it's almost inevitably that there are | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| 8ZbHjRtCEeWBKhJRV_B8Gw | Great, fantastic information that made me see the importance of data sciences in materials science and engineering. My only request would be to potentially spend more time fleshing out PCA and the statistical tools around it; most of it went over my head without seeing a step-by-step application of it that showed the calculations. Maybe it could be optional so that those who are already strong in PCA can skip it. | would be to potentially spend more | Time | fleshing out PCA and the statistical | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | Very interesting course and very timely at the moment given the ground-breaking research in this area! I only have two minor criticisms. Firstly, the presenters seemed to be reading from a script, which made them seem quite wooden and unnatural and thus hard for me to follow at times. Secondly, I would have preferred a little more focus on what we can do to improve our gut microbial diversity. I have tried all the basic advice given with little effect. However, perhaps we just don't know enough at this stage. Also, it would be interesting to explore the anomalies a little more. For example people with high levels of firmicutes who are also lean. Overall, I found the course useful though, thank you! | hard for me to follow at | Time | Secondly, I would have preferred a | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | In general this was an easy, interesting and enjoyable course, Video interviews and lectures by key researchers in this exciting field were a highlight. It's an introductory course so not deep, but fun. A couple of things significantly detracted from the course for me. One was a feeling of unqualified evangelism. I think the microbiome is indeed a hugely important field, but the level of hype here, and lack of any critical perspective, was off-putting. This is particularly disturbing for products like probiotics, which have become a huge industry with little solid evidence to support them, or to choose between them. Also, they devote a lot of time to selling the American Gut Project. Which is a good cause, but I would rather they had spent that time teaching me something useful. I resent being duped into watching ads when I've signed up to be educated. The other thing that bothered me was the course required us to divulge a lot of personal information to other students in pointless, time-consuming projects. I didn't learn anything from these projects and found them annoying. | Also, they devote a lot of | Time | to selling the American Gut Project. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 93w6xNzBEeSvjyIAC3jXcg | In general this was an easy, interesting and enjoyable course, Video interviews and lectures by key researchers in this exciting field were a highlight. It's an introductory course so not deep, but fun. A couple of things significantly detracted from the course for me. One was a feeling of unqualified evangelism. I think the microbiome is indeed a hugely important field, but the level of hype here, and lack of any critical perspective, was off-putting. This is particularly disturbing for products like probiotics, which have become a huge industry with little solid evidence to support them, or to choose between them. Also, they devote a lot of time to selling the American Gut Project. Which is a good cause, but I would rather they had spent that time teaching me something useful. I resent being duped into watching ads when I've signed up to be educated. The other thing that bothered me was the course required us to divulge a lot of personal information to other students in pointless, time-consuming projects. I didn't learn anything from these projects and found them annoying. | would rather they had spent that | Time | teaching me something useful. I resent | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| 9a6pC3gcEeWxvQr3acyajw | Typically writing courses deal with either the business of writing, or the pretentious art and literature side of writing. Almost nobody deals with the science of writing. Where is the talk on motivational arrows? Character likabilities like being unrelenting? Where is the meta-analysis of good techniques in writing? meta-data is the future of defining the science of writing, but it's not mentioned here even slightly. What about will he/won't he moments? Backstory interacting and being relevant to the plot? What about fish out of water? This course doesn't even touch upon foundational pillars and tenets that make good writing. I couldn't imagine paying for this course, since I've already paid too much with my time. As it stands, I could have taught a better course than this, and maybe some day I'll be so fortunate as to move writing studies in the right direction, towards the truth that older generation teachers are unwilling to accept: that good writing is empirical, and therefore can be learned. | already paid too much with my | Time | As it stands, I could have | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 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. | it to anyone willing to spend | Time | to work on their writing. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| 9a6pC3gcEeWxvQr3acyajw | I like this course. I have done some good job and at the same time I can feel some disadvantages of myself. I learned how to find, create a character and how to make them alive. | good job and at the same | Time | I can feel some disadvantages of | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 9a6pC3gcEeWxvQr3acyajw | Good course, but assignment instructions were difficult to understand at times and no examples were given. | instructions were difficult to understand at | Time | and no examples were given. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| 9h_j5XEiEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | I think this is an excellent course very informative and interesting. The only complaint I have isn't with this course in particular but seems to happen frequently in various Coursera courses. I submitted my week 3 assignment 2 days late but the course was still going on for another couple of weeks so I didn't think my assignment would not get graded. I tried live chat, learner help until finally I kept posting in the forums begging someone to grade my course. Finally I got a response from a mentor, Michael Fortune who really offered help to me. There was something wrong with my link that I still need to find out what it was. It wasn't until the next session of this course had completed until Michael, who stuck it out with me trying and ultimately succeeding in getting other students to grade my assignment so I could complete my course and move on to the Capstone Project. I still enjoyed the course despite all that time it took Michael and I to get the assignment graded. | enjoyed the course despite all that | Time | it took Michael and I to | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| 9h_j5XEiEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | This was by far the worst course in the series. There is a lot of good content in this course that needs to be shared, but I just felt the delivery failed in a lot of ways. Here are some issues 1) Often, concepts are thrown out but aren't explained clearly. Speaker glosses over them without giving concrete examples 2) The structure of the course is poorly configured. On several occasions, inline quizzes test you on concepts that haven't been introduced until later in the video, forcing you to guess at answers. Also, the assignment portion of the course asks you to submit a word or pdf with images, but it wasn't configured to allow uploads. You could only submit text in a text box. I realized I wasn't the only person with the issue when I graded assignments from others who had trouble submitting their assignment. In some cases, I believe students failed that portion of the course because they could not figure out how to submit. I have some IT background and was able to share my homework through my shared drive fortunately. 3) The speaker should re-record his lecture. It was obvious (or at least seemed as if) he was reading a teleprompter. There were many awkward pauses between sentences that made it hard to listen to. Often times, the audio presentation were inconsistent with the words in the slide, making it confusing because I didn't know which I should be following. | it hard to listen to. Often | Time | the audio presentation were inconsistent with | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| 9p1NWzJzEeWFJhJQP1CW-Q | Unlike the other two lecturers in this course, this module's lecture is very very bad. I always felt like coming back and learning more with the other two lectures but with this one I had to force myself to complete the lessons. First of all his English is bad, sometimes you cant understand what he means even with subtitles. He repeats many things through out the course and he tries to teach by asking questions all the time. As a guy who takes and make his own notes, I found it really difficult to put together a sentence he was saying. It seems that nobody proof read his lectures before posting it on coursera. I feel that it was done blindly and in a rushed way. If possible can you please change the videos and also the script. Please make it more understandable. | teach by asking questions all the | Time | As a guy who takes and | Negative | 0.73 | 2.0 |
| 9p1NWzJzEeWFJhJQP1CW-Q | it's Fun and worth the time | it's Fun and worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 9p1NWzJzEeWFJhJQP1CW-Q | Short, simplistic. Could be done in a week. Very much a beginner's course for those who have not mindfully observed the game worlds in which they play. The student may come away with a few new ideas and the greatest value is in having peers review the homework assignments. Worth the time, if you quickly breeze through it. | review the homework assignments. Worth the | Time | if you quickly breeze through it. | Positive | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| 9suomDeIEeWJaxK5AT4frw | This capstone project is a bad joke and I'm gonna tell you why! First, ESSEC TAs were never available! We had to contact Coursera several times for weeks to get a simple yet not helpful reply from ESSEC. And it was too late for anything, really... Remember, the whole project lasts for 4 weeks only! Second, several documents required for the weekly assignments were missing! It's fair to say we were all free-styling (i.e. making wild assumptions) our ways through the entire capstone due to lack of necessary information. Third (and most importantly). most of the participants didn't have any basic business background whatsoever. Be prepared to get a bad grade from someone who's clueless about hotel business, not to mention revenue or demand management. That really makes you wonder how these people even passed the last three core courses.... Forth, this capstone is great for those who just want to get a certificate for the sake of having a certificate. Did you notice those 4 or 5 star ratings with no written reviews? Yeah, they were probably trying to show their appreciation for the easy certificate. After all, it's easy to walk away with a decent grade when there's no one knows what's going on. ANYTHING GOES! However, if you are a serious learner who wants to actually learn something, run away from this capstone. You will be thanking me later. All in all, a horrible experience and I wish I could get those 4 weeks of my life back! | We had to contact Coursera several | Time | for weeks to get a simple | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 |
| 9zXfqf2IEeSnBSIACi-PoQ | Excellent course that really teaches or reviews the basics. The only reason I am giving it four stars (which could be unfair) is that I cannot give it 4.5. The only reason I believe this course deserves a 4.5 is the lack of problem sets or changing exams. I'd love to really master the concepts with different figures and situations. This course is still definitely worth your time and effort and is a great introduction or revision. | course is still definitely worth your | Time | and effort and is a great | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 9zXfqf2IEeSnBSIACi-PoQ | I do not judge the course itself as I am a novice. But I can assure it is really well structured, easy to follw, well explained and at times intuitive. The professor has an engaging way to explain and the deadlines are feasable. I took all exams and finished 97.5% which is a good result to a total novice. Good job! I am taking more courses for sure! Thank you Coursera. | to follw, well explained and at | Time | intuitive. The professor has an engaging | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The course is very complete on it's subjects and points, but should have more slides and some times be more grafic about some examples, this makes the lessons boring and harder to follow because there is a massive amount of informations. Also have too much questions on the quizzes. | should have more slides and some | Time | be more grafic about some examples, | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | I've been a supporter of environmental sustainability efforts for a long time, however, I lacked training/knowledge (as my undergraduate studies are in Business). Passion is great, but in the real world, you need skills to back up that passion. I am proud to say that can now engage in active conversations with people who are working in sustainability related fields! This is a very empowering course! | environmental sustainability efforts for a long | Time | however, I lacked training/knowledge (as my | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Very informative for an introductory course. I learned a lot in a short amount of time. | lot in a short amount of | Time | | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This is a very detailed course. You need to bring some time 1 or 2 h a week are not enough. But it is very well structured and everything is very well explained. | course. You need to bring some | Time | 1 or 2 h a week | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | This was a great course! It's like a big summary of this discipline, because it would take a lot longer to study it in depth. The videos are interesting with some graphics to help us out. There is a transcript for every week and I used it every time. The only negative point would be the style of those transcripts; the way they are presented. The paragraphs are not in line and there's no real sections in the text. It makes it harder to read. Overall, I'm really glad with this couse and I must say the online community was definitely an asset. | week and I used it every | Time | The only negative point would be | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Interesting course but: 1) The transcripts for each week are appalling. Here is a copied and pasted example: "Separatist groups remained active in almost 90% of decapitation cases where only a third of ideologically ideological organizations such as left wing and right wing organizations. Are damaged by it. And then, in general, in 17% of the cases. So 7% of the cases, decapitation led to the collapse of an organization." How are those that are hearing impaired meant to understand what the course leader is communicating? It took me so long to understand the transcript that I may as well have listened instead. The subtitles option reads the same as the transcript - not much good for anyone with anything but perfect hearing. 2) The estimated timings for each activity are somewhat optimistic. '10 minutes' is the recommended reading time for each week's reading content. Within this reading list are, on average, 8 articles, some of which amount to over 70 pages - if each article is roughly 25-40 pages on average, and there are around 8 articles, how will this reading activity take the student only '10 minutes' to complete? Apart from that, I did really enjoy the course!! | '10 minutes' is the recommended reading | Time | for each week's reading content. Within | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Loved the time I spent studying this course, if I was going to evaluate it on terms of the title sayings "it's all and more" How is it more? I am already hungry for more :D | Loved the | Time | I spent studying this course, if | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Average. Doesn't really like the Professor's style. He spends too many time trying to explain that he feels really concern about the victims etc. I feel that the content of the class could have been interesting but the organization was messy. Finally it gives the impression that academics know barely anything about the subject. I would have prefer a more historical approach. Overall i've watched all the content but in the future i won't spend much time checking for new Mooc from him. Thanks for the try though | Professor's style. He spends too many | Time | trying to explain that he feels | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Average. Doesn't really like the Professor's style. He spends too many time trying to explain that he feels really concern about the victims etc. I feel that the content of the class could have been interesting but the organization was messy. Finally it gives the impression that academics know barely anything about the subject. I would have prefer a more historical approach. Overall i've watched all the content but in the future i won't spend much time checking for new Mooc from him. Thanks for the try though | the future i won't spend much | Time | checking for new Mooc from him. | Positive | 0.62 | 3.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Good fist MOOC experience. Pity the google hangout wasn't up but never mind. Would prefer more questions in the videos to check I'm listening attentively. Would also like to see a list of all the reading material in one place rather than per lectiure. Then I can go to each web page and save as epub usiing the crhome dotepub extension and copy to my ereader. Anyway you can streamline that kind of admin task would be appreciated. You ought to spruke ways to read the web pages, because reading it on a laptop or even tablet is a bit tedious. Also with the PDFs, some info on saving them as resizable PDFs would be appreciated. Course content was good and I like the coursera front end. Need someway to manage tthe growing library of reading material that accumalates not just with this one course but if you do multiple MOOCs over time, Thank! | if you do multiple MOOCs over | Time | Thank! | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | I am enjoying this course very much, it is informative and very well organized and presented. I highly recommend it to anyone with an internet in the topic as it provides an excellent overview and includes current academic and non academic (mass media, world leaders. etc). perspectives. The video lectures are exciting and I look forward to the time I spend viewing them, the core readings are relevant and there are good suggestions for those wanted to gain a deeper understanding of the material. Dr Edwin Bakker the professor for this course is an excellent educator. | and I look forward to the | Time | I spend viewing them, the core | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Well worth the time spent! | Well worth the | Time | spent! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Amazing teaching and reading files. Having a great time learning. | and reading files. Having a great | Time | learning. | Positive | 0.98 | 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! | guest scholars who gave their valuable | Time | to this course. I think this | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | A lot of reading is needed which, on one hand, is beneficial to the students but on the other can be exhausting as well. Anyway, I had a great time and gain a better perspective on terrorism. | well. Anyway, I had a great | Time | and gain a better perspective on | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | Love this couse, love how explain things. The best is that is open all the time and i can go to school, work and then take this course. | is that is open all the | Time | and i can go to school, | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | I had a great time learning the various ways I can develop, maintain and protect my personal brand in the digital age we live in. Thank you! | I had a great | Time | learning the various ways I can | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Quite Complete to be a short course, enjoy everything, discover a lot of myself on the website world, which was great and hopefully with a little bit of time I'll be able to "bulletproof" (or a least try harder) my digital networks. Thanks! Really helpful. | hopefully with a little bit of | Time | I'll be able to " bulletproof" | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Kimberley is a wonderful instructor keeping the student engaged with her wonderful personality and wit. The information is well suited to someone with very limited experience in personal branding and social media. Having said that, the information is clear and concise and worth the time for someone with more experience just to make sure they haven't missed a little gem of knowledge. | clear and concise and worth the | Time | for someone with more experience just | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Great course. Everything is clear and easy to follow. Some of the things I already knew and some that I didn't, but it was good to hear it all from a different source and using words. Definitely worth the time. | and using words. Definitely worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| a3f86i8hEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | I´ve never taken on-line classes, but being this the first time I must say that it is a great method to learn with some flexibility. I would encourage these courses to improve their final assignament grading, as it is the warranty of trusting that any body with a coursera certificate has passed a rigorous evaluation plan. | classes, but being this the first | Time | I must say that it is | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| a3f86i8hEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | This review is for Coursera. Why you want me to click 2 times to submit a review? On home screen when i click on stars to review, new window opens.. This is not a great UX.. Please reduce no of clicks that a user has to make to submit the reviews. | you want me to click 2 | Time | to submit a review? On home | Negative | 0.87 | 1.0 |
| a3f86i8hEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | I'm really excited about this course and happy about the time investment; Indebted to the professors. | this course and happy about the | Time | investment; Indebted to the professors. | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This course was ultimately frustrating to take. There is a gap in the material presented and the skill set needed to complete the assignments. Using optional methods to complete this course, such as to use the textbook and forums, is too time consuming (deciphering a text book) or insulting (forum mentor responses). To to solve the assignments, it usually involved trying to 1. refreshing yourself in math concepts not used by a beginner or non-mathematician, 2. deciphering what exactly the poorly written questions were asking, 3. scouring the textbook or internet for functions or strategies never covered in the lecture, 4. having snarky and unhelpful remarks by mentors. The unprofessional behavior of the mentors was especially hard to handle. Even from the early week's lectures we learned about semantics, and how simple mistyping could lead to programming errors, so I wrongly assumed the mentors would understand that some of us would probably make simple errors. For example, in the final homework I had a simple mistake, but since we cannot show code, it led to more frustration and a mentor basically just saying "we covered this already." I'm well aware of what we covered, but if someone is stuck on a problem, there needs to be a much better way of helping that person. I did not want to write in the forums after my initial foray in the forum led one mentor to just tell me "your logic is wrong", and the spout the same simple strategies of the lecture that could not help on the complex assignment. There probably will not be anything fixed with this course since it seems like it has been the same for years now. Please fix the questions, stop using Project Euler, and let people directly message code to mentors. Will probably save time rather than try to blindly (and frustratingly) explain code over and over again. Ultimately, I felt that unless someone either has previous experience in coding, or has no work to do other than to do this course, it still is not worth it to just obtain a certificate. | the textbook and forums, is too | Time | consuming (deciphering a text book) or | Negative | 0.87 | 1.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This course was ultimately frustrating to take. There is a gap in the material presented and the skill set needed to complete the assignments. Using optional methods to complete this course, such as to use the textbook and forums, is too time consuming (deciphering a text book) or insulting (forum mentor responses). To to solve the assignments, it usually involved trying to 1. refreshing yourself in math concepts not used by a beginner or non-mathematician, 2. deciphering what exactly the poorly written questions were asking, 3. scouring the textbook or internet for functions or strategies never covered in the lecture, 4. having snarky and unhelpful remarks by mentors. The unprofessional behavior of the mentors was especially hard to handle. Even from the early week's lectures we learned about semantics, and how simple mistyping could lead to programming errors, so I wrongly assumed the mentors would understand that some of us would probably make simple errors. For example, in the final homework I had a simple mistake, but since we cannot show code, it led to more frustration and a mentor basically just saying "we covered this already." I'm well aware of what we covered, but if someone is stuck on a problem, there needs to be a much better way of helping that person. I did not want to write in the forums after my initial foray in the forum led one mentor to just tell me "your logic is wrong", and the spout the same simple strategies of the lecture that could not help on the complex assignment. There probably will not be anything fixed with this course since it seems like it has been the same for years now. Please fix the questions, stop using Project Euler, and let people directly message code to mentors. Will probably save time rather than try to blindly (and frustratingly) explain code over and over again. Ultimately, I felt that unless someone either has previous experience in coding, or has no work to do other than to do this course, it still is not worth it to just obtain a certificate. | code to mentors. Will probably save | Time | rather than try to blindly (and | Negative | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | Positive points: -this really is a beginners course, without any knowledge about coding or the syntax of MATLAB necessary. -you learn by solving the problems yourself. This gives you great insight about the thought processes necessary, about different approaches and how to realize your ideas. -Mentors are responding quickly (sometimes within a half hour) and are doing there best to help you out. Negative points: -The video lectures, although informative have a very slow paste and the earlier ones do not prepare you that well for the homework assignments. However once you get used to it you will manage to get an idea about the assignments from the lectures. Still the same problem is illustrated way too often in the same lecture. One could either add different problems or shorten the lectures a lot. With time it is possible to learn when one can skip a section but it makes it especially hard for people to start the course, since one spends hours watching videos for just learning about basic syntax in the beginning - For some of the homework assignments the mathematical part was the bigger challenge for me than the coding part, which is really frustrating when you just want to learn how to code. | shorten the lectures a lot. With | Time | it is possible to learn when | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This is the only one course, I have paid for certificate. I liked most of the course. Instructor has a unique way of teaching Matlab. He started Matlab basics. After that, he had shown functions. The reason of showing functions at the very first times was to evaluate the problems. I am so surprised when I have seen the usage of column operator in such different ways. Course was followed by decision structures, loops, strings and file I/O. The course content was well prepared. Video lectures are quite helpful. Especially, 1 hour problem solving example video was so beneficial. However, at the end of the course, problems become quite challenging and time consuming. In first 6 problem set, my success rate was 100%. But, in last two week's problems I was able to solve only 5 of 8. The problems become difficult to understand, there were not enough explanations or hints. Discussion pages were not useful some times. I had to make further research on internet to understand the problem and it was time consuming. In the new version of the course, it would be better if problems are clear to understand. In short, the Instructors and Mentors did great job. Do I suggest this course to anyone else? The answer is definitely YES! Thank you. | showing functions at the very first | Time | was to evaluate the problems. I | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This is the only one course, I have paid for certificate. I liked most of the course. Instructor has a unique way of teaching Matlab. He started Matlab basics. After that, he had shown functions. The reason of showing functions at the very first times was to evaluate the problems. I am so surprised when I have seen the usage of column operator in such different ways. Course was followed by decision structures, loops, strings and file I/O. The course content was well prepared. Video lectures are quite helpful. Especially, 1 hour problem solving example video was so beneficial. However, at the end of the course, problems become quite challenging and time consuming. In first 6 problem set, my success rate was 100%. But, in last two week's problems I was able to solve only 5 of 8. The problems become difficult to understand, there were not enough explanations or hints. Discussion pages were not useful some times. I had to make further research on internet to understand the problem and it was time consuming. In the new version of the course, it would be better if problems are clear to understand. In short, the Instructors and Mentors did great job. Do I suggest this course to anyone else? The answer is definitely YES! Thank you. | course, problems become quite challenging and | Time | consuming. In first 6 problem set, | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This is the only one course, I have paid for certificate. I liked most of the course. Instructor has a unique way of teaching Matlab. He started Matlab basics. After that, he had shown functions. The reason of showing functions at the very first times was to evaluate the problems. I am so surprised when I have seen the usage of column operator in such different ways. Course was followed by decision structures, loops, strings and file I/O. The course content was well prepared. Video lectures are quite helpful. Especially, 1 hour problem solving example video was so beneficial. However, at the end of the course, problems become quite challenging and time consuming. In first 6 problem set, my success rate was 100%. But, in last two week's problems I was able to solve only 5 of 8. The problems become difficult to understand, there were not enough explanations or hints. Discussion pages were not useful some times. I had to make further research on internet to understand the problem and it was time consuming. In the new version of the course, it would be better if problems are clear to understand. In short, the Instructors and Mentors did great job. Do I suggest this course to anyone else? The answer is definitely YES! Thank you. | Discussion pages were not useful some | Time | I had to make further research | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | This is the only one course, I have paid for certificate. I liked most of the course. Instructor has a unique way of teaching Matlab. He started Matlab basics. After that, he had shown functions. The reason of showing functions at the very first times was to evaluate the problems. I am so surprised when I have seen the usage of column operator in such different ways. Course was followed by decision structures, loops, strings and file I/O. The course content was well prepared. Video lectures are quite helpful. Especially, 1 hour problem solving example video was so beneficial. However, at the end of the course, problems become quite challenging and time consuming. In first 6 problem set, my success rate was 100%. But, in last two week's problems I was able to solve only 5 of 8. The problems become difficult to understand, there were not enough explanations or hints. Discussion pages were not useful some times. I had to make further research on internet to understand the problem and it was time consuming. In the new version of the course, it would be better if problems are clear to understand. In short, the Instructors and Mentors did great job. Do I suggest this course to anyone else? The answer is definitely YES! Thank you. | understand the problem and it was | Time | consuming. In the new version of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| A4W_GyDjEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | A brilliant course for both beginners and experienced programmers. The professor carries along with a steady pace and has made good problem sets to increase learning. His lecture style is so inspiring , informative and sometimes funny that i find myself spending most of my time in this course. Hope people at Vanderbilt continue to produce such valuable courses in the future. | find myself spending most of my | Time | in this course. Hope people at | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| A82QaHtJEeSliSIAC0EO7A | Time for an update. | | Time | for an update. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| A82QaHtJEeSliSIAC0EO7A | From the general to the particular, it was what I was looking for. Seeking information about the healthcare info management, exchange and processing; knowing who it works in detail, improvements through time and how the role of the IT has been evolving so far. I founded crucial when thinking about future possible innovations in different aspects within the field. | it works in detail, improvements through | Time | and how the role of the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| A82QaHtJEeSliSIAC0EO7A | A very high level overview of what needs to be done in the next n number of years to improve the population health by x times. | improve the population health by x | Time | | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| A97cQkR4EeawVwo82dylKw | +: I reached my goal for the course and now I understand a bit about R. I succeeded to pass within much shorter time than anticipated course duration. The course certificate is posted to my Linkedin profile. -: No human mentors on the course discussion forum - all questions answered by other students. Automatic tests in swirl are too restrictive and do not accept perfectly correct student solutions slightly different to those anticipated by the authors. Week 2 assignment is much different from the reading material. Nothing taught about charting in R. Overall comment: I think it is good value for money. | succeeded to pass within much shorter | Time | than anticipated course duration. The course | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| A9OckSDZEeWXzxJxfIL00w | second time I take this course!!!!!! | second | Time | I take this course! ! ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| A9OckSDZEeWXzxJxfIL00w | This course is extraordinary. The 2 professors who present the material are both experts in their respective areas: Holocaust history and Comparative Literature. They present the material not only from a profound academic understanding, they are both children of the Holocaust. And so they convey the material in a deeply personal and human way as well. Using the Holocaust as a momentous backdrop, the professors challenge the students to examine important philosophical questions throughout the course. The books and movies discussed are absolutely wonderful. Finally, the relationship between Murray and Peter, that of deep trust and respect, contrast so powerfully with the inhumanity of the topic they present. This is one of the best courses that I have ever taken in my life, including my time during college. | taken in my life, including my | Time | during college. | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| A9OckSDZEeWXzxJxfIL00w | So far this course is fantastic. I have taken classes on this subject before however, the personal touches and the passion of both professors is contagious !! I recommend that all high school and secondary students should take this course, lest we forget and repeat these atrocities. Thank you both for a fascinating look at a terrible time in history!! | a fascinating look at a terrible | Time | in history! ! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Great course, their are parts that are dry and very academic but taking the time to listen and take will payoff and be very rewarding. I particularly found the neuroscience research most interesting and engaging. The labs are a great way to end tie together everything that is learned in each section from: academic to science to history/application. | and very academic but taking the | Time | to listen and take will payoff | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | First time as a long (more than 30 years) empirical yoga and meditation practitioner that take an academic approach outside the masters himself. Wonderful experience. Very well done, excellent material and the best professors. Thanks | First | Time | as a long (more than 30 | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Audio was difficult to hear at times | Audio was difficult to hear at | Time | | Positive | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | It´s a very complete course with a lot of detail and valuable information. For me it has two parts, one very technical and the other that is more into the spiritual meditation and techniques. I think it was worth the time and effort. Thanks a lot! | I think it was worth the | Time | and effort. Thanks a lot! | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course was one of the most useful of my undergraduate and graduate career. I have been a long time Buddhist practitioner, primarily in the Zen tradition and found it difficult to integrate, both in my own practice and through understanding popular literature. This course provided much of the intellectual background that I have wanted for a long time. I am particularly interested in the discussion of Buddhist Meditation as a religious vs. secular practice, and the cultural content of the various practices one encounters. David Germano's lectures are incredibly information dense. I learned to download the transcript and outline and highlight them as well as listen to the audio. Now I wouldn't cut out a thing. I particularly appreciate the many guest lectures, interviews and guided meditation sessions. All of my questions are not yet answered but I have some clearer understanding and ideas for moving forward. | career. I have been a long | Time | Buddhist practitioner, primarily in the Zen | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course was one of the most useful of my undergraduate and graduate career. I have been a long time Buddhist practitioner, primarily in the Zen tradition and found it difficult to integrate, both in my own practice and through understanding popular literature. This course provided much of the intellectual background that I have wanted for a long time. I am particularly interested in the discussion of Buddhist Meditation as a religious vs. secular practice, and the cultural content of the various practices one encounters. David Germano's lectures are incredibly information dense. I learned to download the transcript and outline and highlight them as well as listen to the audio. Now I wouldn't cut out a thing. I particularly appreciate the many guest lectures, interviews and guided meditation sessions. All of my questions are not yet answered but I have some clearer understanding and ideas for moving forward. | I have wanted for a long | Time | I am particularly interested in the | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Before I began this course, I had only a very general knowledge of Buddhist meditation. After going through a number of lessons, I realized I really knew less than I thought. I had only been attracted to the Buddhist world encountered in readings and travels. For many years, it was something that I wanted to know more about. So I appreciate having access to this course. Classification and organization of detailed and complex material is well organized. Great work amassing and presenting knowledge of contemplative practices. I feel there was some repetition or redundancy, but in my case that was not necessarily a bad thing, other than to add to the mass of information being delivered. The repetition helped to stabilize my memory and helped to establish a baseline of concepts from which to build my understanding. I became mired in detail, but absorbed as much as I could in lieu of being able to recall consciously specific pieces of information. I don't want to judge the presenters by suggesting that they tried to put too much information into too little of a space. I found my efforts to absorb the info meditative in nature, thus I welcomed the challenge. The videos of presenters reading texts of detailed and dense info was difficult to follow at times, but I discovered that it helps, in some cases, to download the script of the talks and follow along with the video as I read the script. The focus on history and historical debates and conflicts between shamatha and vipassana practices, etc., within Buddhism were helpful but not as key as the meditation practices. I suppose it is difficult to separate them since they are so entwined. I have learned a lot more than I ever expected when I began this course. I value discussions and sharing among students, but the course is so dense and time consuming that I had no time left to participate in sharing with others. Not to devalue the info itself, which is fantastic. | info was difficult to follow at | Time | but I discovered that it helps, | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Before I began this course, I had only a very general knowledge of Buddhist meditation. After going through a number of lessons, I realized I really knew less than I thought. I had only been attracted to the Buddhist world encountered in readings and travels. For many years, it was something that I wanted to know more about. So I appreciate having access to this course. Classification and organization of detailed and complex material is well organized. Great work amassing and presenting knowledge of contemplative practices. I feel there was some repetition or redundancy, but in my case that was not necessarily a bad thing, other than to add to the mass of information being delivered. The repetition helped to stabilize my memory and helped to establish a baseline of concepts from which to build my understanding. I became mired in detail, but absorbed as much as I could in lieu of being able to recall consciously specific pieces of information. I don't want to judge the presenters by suggesting that they tried to put too much information into too little of a space. I found my efforts to absorb the info meditative in nature, thus I welcomed the challenge. The videos of presenters reading texts of detailed and dense info was difficult to follow at times, but I discovered that it helps, in some cases, to download the script of the talks and follow along with the video as I read the script. The focus on history and historical debates and conflicts between shamatha and vipassana practices, etc., within Buddhism were helpful but not as key as the meditation practices. I suppose it is difficult to separate them since they are so entwined. I have learned a lot more than I ever expected when I began this course. I value discussions and sharing among students, but the course is so dense and time consuming that I had no time left to participate in sharing with others. Not to devalue the info itself, which is fantastic. | the course is so dense and | Time | consuming that I had no time | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Before I began this course, I had only a very general knowledge of Buddhist meditation. After going through a number of lessons, I realized I really knew less than I thought. I had only been attracted to the Buddhist world encountered in readings and travels. For many years, it was something that I wanted to know more about. So I appreciate having access to this course. Classification and organization of detailed and complex material is well organized. Great work amassing and presenting knowledge of contemplative practices. I feel there was some repetition or redundancy, but in my case that was not necessarily a bad thing, other than to add to the mass of information being delivered. The repetition helped to stabilize my memory and helped to establish a baseline of concepts from which to build my understanding. I became mired in detail, but absorbed as much as I could in lieu of being able to recall consciously specific pieces of information. I don't want to judge the presenters by suggesting that they tried to put too much information into too little of a space. I found my efforts to absorb the info meditative in nature, thus I welcomed the challenge. The videos of presenters reading texts of detailed and dense info was difficult to follow at times, but I discovered that it helps, in some cases, to download the script of the talks and follow along with the video as I read the script. The focus on history and historical debates and conflicts between shamatha and vipassana practices, etc., within Buddhism were helpful but not as key as the meditation practices. I suppose it is difficult to separate them since they are so entwined. I have learned a lot more than I ever expected when I began this course. I value discussions and sharing among students, but the course is so dense and time consuming that I had no time left to participate in sharing with others. Not to devalue the info itself, which is fantastic. | time consuming that I had no | Time | left to participate in sharing with | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Amazing insight into various contexts surrounding Meditation, coverage of different cultures interpretation of meditative(contemplative) approaches, roadmap of practice to pursue a lifetime. Also on the side, covers academic dimensions of real life applications and impacts. Quite honored to come across such an enriched course and accruing such immense knowledge in such a short time. Hoping to revisit again in future to comeback to basics and not just veer away into real life applications and lose the way. | immense knowledge in such a short | Time | Hoping to revisit again in future | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Watch one or 2 lectures before you join the course, if you felt okay then go ahead, otherwise don't waste your time and money, something wrong in the course structure... | go ahead, otherwise don't waste your | Time | and money, something wrong in the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is pretty amazing and contains an enormous amount of information. Some of it is presented in a very boring and hard to follow way. It took patience but is worth the time. | took patience but is worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The positive. What a wealth of material! This is a very worthy attempt to integrate the history, philosophical underpinnings and modern transformations of Tibetan Buddhist meditation. Clifford Saron’s Week 2 lectures on neuroscience and neuroplasticity were fascinating and intriguing introductions to the topic - very engaging. The negative. Too academic for an introductory course. David Germano’s lectures are full of information but he doesn’t help the learner to make sense of it. His ‘academic speak’ obfuscates meaning rather than making it accessible. More diagrammatic slides at the start would give learners a framework of the overarching concepts. Because of the many perspectives presented each week, this course needs A LOT of time. I personally would have leaned better if the course were broken into smaller weekly segments. | this course needs A LOT of | Time | I personally would have leaned better | Negative | 0.9 | 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-. | it well) are having a hard | Time | making ends meet. (That's just my | Neutral | 0.50 | 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-. | a paper in 5% of the | Time | someone else reads it to me | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The course is very detailed, focused, comprehensive and very well organized. Although i gave the course full five stars, there are a few things that can be better. Firstly is the time frame for every week, that is, to my opinion, unreasonable for someone who wants to really study the material. Secondly is that in could have been served in a bit more engaging manner. Thank you very much! Guy | can be better. Firstly is the | Time | frame for every week, that is, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I enjoyed and benefitted from some of this course. In particular I would highly recommend the Meditation Labs, the Science of Meditation videos and the short presentations from the Tibetan Buddhist monks . But I think the creators of this course need to be a lot clearer about what their aims are in that part of the course which Dr Germano presented. Since this was he was presenting the main overview of Buddhist content it was particularly disappointing that his presentations were so bad. I understand that there were difficulties in getting the course up and running from the various delays in its starting date and the change to its title and perhaps Dr Germano's role was more affected than the other lecturers. However it's pretty damning when he manages to to be so off-putting to so many of the students, going on the discussion comments. For my own part, I've studied and practiced Buddhism for more than 30 years and I am left with little sense of what his aims were for his lectures. To be more specific Dr Germano's Presentation: -he read from what I presume were lecture notes but more likely he was reading from an academic paper. the language was pretty turgid. -he could have just provided a PDF of his paper / notes for us to download. That would have been much more helpful as presumably it would have had some structure to it. doing that would have enabled him to use his video time in a more creative way. -MOOCs are wonderful audio-visual opportunities but he had no slides or illustrations at all. The few text headers which appeared then disappeared in only a very few seconds and sometimes did not relate directly to what he was saying at that time. Dr Germano's content: the amended title was Tibetan Buddhist Meditation. This is a complex subject which encompasses many layers of meditation practice culled from historically earlier Buddhist traditions. Can I suggest that any future version of this course includes the following: -include a video which presents the main aspects of the historical development of Buddhism. There was some mention of this in Germano's material but he did it from the Tibetan point of view. Surely what a modern day presentation needs is a modern impartial historical analysis of the subject. It's not as if there aren't plenty of academics and practitioners who are active in this field. -it's confusing to describe Tibetan Lesser Vehicle practices but then illustrate them with Pali text sources, modern Mindfulness practice, and modern Brahma Vihara practice all of which have emerged from the modern Theravadin tradition. -it's also perplexing to include information about many modern Theravadin teachers (Sayadaw, Goenka) in a course apparently not about them. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the videos about Sayadaw and the interview with Sharon Saltzberg, but I am left in the dark about just what differences, if any, there are between them and Tibetan meditation. Overall I think this course was offered prematurely. Much of its content was enthralling, inspiring and very useful practically. However much of it was not. | enabled him to use his video | Time | in a more creative way. -MOOCs | Positive | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I enjoyed and benefitted from some of this course. In particular I would highly recommend the Meditation Labs, the Science of Meditation videos and the short presentations from the Tibetan Buddhist monks . But I think the creators of this course need to be a lot clearer about what their aims are in that part of the course which Dr Germano presented. Since this was he was presenting the main overview of Buddhist content it was particularly disappointing that his presentations were so bad. I understand that there were difficulties in getting the course up and running from the various delays in its starting date and the change to its title and perhaps Dr Germano's role was more affected than the other lecturers. However it's pretty damning when he manages to to be so off-putting to so many of the students, going on the discussion comments. For my own part, I've studied and practiced Buddhism for more than 30 years and I am left with little sense of what his aims were for his lectures. To be more specific Dr Germano's Presentation: -he read from what I presume were lecture notes but more likely he was reading from an academic paper. the language was pretty turgid. -he could have just provided a PDF of his paper / notes for us to download. That would have been much more helpful as presumably it would have had some structure to it. doing that would have enabled him to use his video time in a more creative way. -MOOCs are wonderful audio-visual opportunities but he had no slides or illustrations at all. The few text headers which appeared then disappeared in only a very few seconds and sometimes did not relate directly to what he was saying at that time. Dr Germano's content: the amended title was Tibetan Buddhist Meditation. This is a complex subject which encompasses many layers of meditation practice culled from historically earlier Buddhist traditions. Can I suggest that any future version of this course includes the following: -include a video which presents the main aspects of the historical development of Buddhism. There was some mention of this in Germano's material but he did it from the Tibetan point of view. Surely what a modern day presentation needs is a modern impartial historical analysis of the subject. It's not as if there aren't plenty of academics and practitioners who are active in this field. -it's confusing to describe Tibetan Lesser Vehicle practices but then illustrate them with Pali text sources, modern Mindfulness practice, and modern Brahma Vihara practice all of which have emerged from the modern Theravadin tradition. -it's also perplexing to include information about many modern Theravadin teachers (Sayadaw, Goenka) in a course apparently not about them. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the videos about Sayadaw and the interview with Sharon Saltzberg, but I am left in the dark about just what differences, if any, there are between them and Tibetan meditation. Overall I think this course was offered prematurely. Much of its content was enthralling, inspiring and very useful practically. However much of it was not. | what he was saying at that | Time | Dr Germano's content: the amended title | Positive | 0.69 | 2.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | wonderful course, LOT of material that you need to go through number of times to digest. the work is totally worth it. Provides insight into a very distant and complex world view we westerners can learn a lot from. | need to go through number of | Time | to digest. the work is totally | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The content of the course is amazingly rich. I've particularly appreciated all the interviews. The science was also very interesting, although at the end (starting from week 4 if I remember well), the result don't seem so convincing. But it is still really amazing. (May I suggest to try to use Machine Learning algorithm to analyze the huge amount of result from the retreat project, they are getting pretty good at facial recognition and analysis.) The contemplative labs were an interesting plus. The only caveats is that, although the content presented by Germano and Schaeffer is amazing (and precious to me), I think they could improve the presentation. I would suggest to consult with a specialist in communication who will be able to point out what could be improved and how. I feel that without that, the communication objective will fail (as reported by most students including myself). Here are a few points I have noticed. Complex background create a distraction, especially when the reading is monotonous, it's preferable to have simple neutral background, like a library. Reading in a monotonous voice is not engaging for the viewer. Dandling around and all sort of gestural distractions don't help us focusing on the content. Sentences are too long and use too many technical words, two things that any communicator will immediately suggest to drop especially if you are targeting a large audience. In one video the background was nice (a forest), yet the noise of the bird were too loud compare to the voice. Plus there was many cut in this video and almost every time the camera had moved from its previous position creating yet another distraction. But don't get me wrong, I have appreciated this content, I just felt that it needed a huge investment from my part to be able to grab it into memory and learn from it. This is the reason why I haven't graded this course with 5 stars. I think that if the speaker could improve this part it would facilitate the students work and improve greatly the overall learning. | in this video and almost every | Time | the camera had moved from its | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very good a bit too academic by times but otherwise a goldmine for anyone interested in the science and context of buddhist meditation | good a bit too academic by | Time | but otherwise a goldmine for anyone | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I waited a long time for this class to start but now that it is here I find it impossible summon enough will to pay attention to the lectures. As a retired teacher I have more of an ability to stick to a class than many but life is too short to wait for this class to perk up. The professors seem very knowledgable but their teaching methodology leaves a lot to be desired. | I waited a long | Time | for this class to start but | Negative | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The content is great, I think the delivery could be better, and there was a great deal of interesting but difficult and for me peripheral stuff about how the brain worked. Nevertheless, even this had me wowed at times. I have learnt a great deal from every aspect of this course, and am greatly looking forward to future courses, as you have promised!. A | even this had me wowed at | Time | I have learnt a great deal | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| 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'. | They were so bad that, at | Time | what was written was exactly the | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| aaNxjzc9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I was looking forward to starting this course, but so far, checking through the delivery of the first 4 weeks, I can't see spending time voluntarily following this. There is no doubt a lot of work put into this, but it is painful to take part, so no thanks for me. | 4 weeks, I can't see spending | Time | voluntarily following this. There is no | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| aAo9tS8NEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | The information was interesting but sort of long. In fact, I started this so long ago that I don't remember most of what was said, only that it was long. I did enjoy the first course, America's Written Constitution but someone was paying attention then and it was on the older format so it was better. I rate the course so poorly, however, because of the total lack of staff involvement and the worthless peer review papers. I have a huge problem with the peer review process. It is of no value and should be banned. Be that as it may, however, it takes weeks to get reviews and there is NO ONE FROM THE COURSE STAFF PAYING ANY ATTENTION TO THE COURSE!! There is not one posting from course staff in the forums. There has been no response to any of the so called, "comment on this assignment" messages I've been leaving since JULY. There has been no response to an e-mail, supposedly sent to the instructor on my behalf by the Coursera help desk weeks ago. It is obvious that the instructor has abandoned this course. If no one is going to pay attention to it, it should be taken down. If you just want the information, watch the videos but don't expect anything else, including any response whatsoever from this course. I've wasted too much time on this. I'm done. | this course. I've wasted too much | Time | on this. I'm done. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| AeZELZrJEeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Really great, a little more specificity on the subjects (More time) would be even better. | more specificity on the subjects (More | Time | would be even better. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Some lessons are too simple. The homework is not very clear and you need much more time to do it than it is said. | clear and you need much more | Time | to do it than it is | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This was the paper I was most looking forward to in the Interaction Design specialisation. Unfortunately it seems as if they ran out of time to design it properly (despite extending its start date several times). I didn't learn what I would've expected and all of the assignments blurred into one another | as if they ran out of | Time | to design it properly (despite extending | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This was the paper I was most looking forward to in the Interaction Design specialisation. Unfortunately it seems as if they ran out of time to design it properly (despite extending its start date several times). I didn't learn what I would've expected and all of the assignments blurred into one another | (despite extending its start date several | Time | I didn't learn what I would've | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Video lectures did not provide much information. Coursework instructions were unclear (and had typos). I enrolled in November, but the course start date kept getting pushed back by a week or two at a time until it was ready 4 months later. With all of the extra time taken to put the course together, I expected to get a lot more out of it. | a week or two at a | Time | until it was ready 4 months | Negative | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Video lectures did not provide much information. Coursework instructions were unclear (and had typos). I enrolled in November, but the course start date kept getting pushed back by a week or two at a time until it was ready 4 months later. With all of the extra time taken to put the course together, I expected to get a lot more out of it. | later. With all of the extra | Time | taken to put the course together, | Positive | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | A bit of a mess. If you are going in expecting to learn nuances of creating effective wireframes and mockups, you will be disappointed. Assignments are good and thought-provoking, but not clearly written. You will get out of the course what you invest in it. Take your assignments seriously and invest a lot of time, even if you know that you are able to pass with a lesser effort. | seriously and invest a lot of | Time | even if you know that you | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| afay6xVFEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Poor video editing. Homework assignments were poorly written making it difficult to know exactly what was being graded. Often times I had to submit a version and redo it after I started working through the grading criteria during peer review. Decent information covered, however I felt like this was more of a course on responsive design than specifically information design. | exactly what was being graded. Often | Time | I had to submit a version | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I dislike whole specialization.Because videos are waste of time. They are teaching little things with long videos. Also I don't easily understand the accent of the speaker. | specialization. Because videos are waste of | Time | They are teaching little things with | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | It was good but i felt the last two weeks like stuffing content. I'd have like to dig deeper into mobile development instead of wasting time in appleTV | into mobile development instead of wasting | Time | in appleTV | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I liked this course, but there were a couple of advanced topics (Core Data, WatchOS/TvOS) that I wish we could have more time to spend on. I feel like there wasn't enough time to complete the assignment as we had in the previous courses. | I wish we could have more | Time | to spend on. I feel like | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I liked this course, but there were a couple of advanced topics (Core Data, WatchOS/TvOS) that I wish we could have more time to spend on. I feel like there wasn't enough time to complete the assignment as we had in the previous courses. | I feel like there wasn't enough | Time | to complete the assignment as we | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| AMBr8zelEeWJaxK5AT4frw | This course had too much content in one-run and some of the topic-assignments had too much confusing questions and answers which were hard to figure out made this course a bit a bad experience. The same goes for the end-assignment project where much functionality was required within a short time -- and the course was delayed so many of the students could not fit it into their schedule. | functionality was required within a short | Time | -- and the course was delayed | Positive | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| aPM0Nx7iEea8agoSdQeRvQ | The material in this course is well presented, though scarce at times. However it has its share of problems : -little to no interaction from TA's or mentors in the forums -the quizzes are often out of sync with the lectures -the final exam has severe problems with questions (form not content). In more detail, on the final exam, some of the questions don't even contain all the content to answer them. They can request multiple answers but have single question boxes and/or the reverse. | is well presented, though scarce at | Time | However it has its share of | Positive | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | Good introduction to the galaxy tool. However, the final project was too difficult for what was given in the lectures. I spent 97% of the time I spent on the course doing only the final project. It was too difficult and unfair. I think a way to improve the final project might be to make easier a little bit and give exclusive lectures to help students to do the final project. | lectures. I spent 97% of the | Time | I spent on the course doing | Negative | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | The cloud computing service with amazon described in the course is not free anymore. I was charged money for using it. The course also took much more time to complete than I wanted to spend. I believe a better design of the project could lead to a more efficient, less frustrating learning experience. Details below. The usegalaxy server was extremely slow. As shown in the course, I installed an instance of galaxy in the AWS/Amazon Cloud. I was under the impression that this was a free service for the first year. Amazon has changed its interfaces and I could not do the installation as recommended. But I managed to run a few analyses with some workarounds. I did not explicitely terminated the galaxy instance for ~ 6 days. Charges of $280 accumulated. The course project in week 4 was far beyond what was covered in the lectures. It took me a whole week, spending multiple hours every day. Many dead-end roads coupled with extremely long run times on the galaxy servers resulted in very inefficient learning and many frustrations. Help via the discussion forum was critical to design an analysis pipeline - so thank you Dejan and all contributors for the support. This is not a course I could easily do part-time: I don’t have time to read the fine print on what is available for free on Amazon, nor do I have time to go through all of the tools on galaxy to find out what would be the best for my analysis. On the positive side: I think Galaxy is a great tool. | The course also took much more | Time | to complete than I wanted to | Negative | 0.86 | 1.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | The cloud computing service with amazon described in the course is not free anymore. I was charged money for using it. The course also took much more time to complete than I wanted to spend. I believe a better design of the project could lead to a more efficient, less frustrating learning experience. Details below. The usegalaxy server was extremely slow. As shown in the course, I installed an instance of galaxy in the AWS/Amazon Cloud. I was under the impression that this was a free service for the first year. Amazon has changed its interfaces and I could not do the installation as recommended. But I managed to run a few analyses with some workarounds. I did not explicitely terminated the galaxy instance for ~ 6 days. Charges of $280 accumulated. The course project in week 4 was far beyond what was covered in the lectures. It took me a whole week, spending multiple hours every day. Many dead-end roads coupled with extremely long run times on the galaxy servers resulted in very inefficient learning and many frustrations. Help via the discussion forum was critical to design an analysis pipeline - so thank you Dejan and all contributors for the support. This is not a course I could easily do part-time: I don’t have time to read the fine print on what is available for free on Amazon, nor do I have time to go through all of the tools on galaxy to find out what would be the best for my analysis. On the positive side: I think Galaxy is a great tool. | roads coupled with extremely long run | Time | on the galaxy servers resulted in | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | The cloud computing service with amazon described in the course is not free anymore. I was charged money for using it. The course also took much more time to complete than I wanted to spend. I believe a better design of the project could lead to a more efficient, less frustrating learning experience. Details below. The usegalaxy server was extremely slow. As shown in the course, I installed an instance of galaxy in the AWS/Amazon Cloud. I was under the impression that this was a free service for the first year. Amazon has changed its interfaces and I could not do the installation as recommended. But I managed to run a few analyses with some workarounds. I did not explicitely terminated the galaxy instance for ~ 6 days. Charges of $280 accumulated. The course project in week 4 was far beyond what was covered in the lectures. It took me a whole week, spending multiple hours every day. Many dead-end roads coupled with extremely long run times on the galaxy servers resulted in very inefficient learning and many frustrations. Help via the discussion forum was critical to design an analysis pipeline - so thank you Dejan and all contributors for the support. This is not a course I could easily do part-time: I don’t have time to read the fine print on what is available for free on Amazon, nor do I have time to go through all of the tools on galaxy to find out what would be the best for my analysis. On the positive side: I think Galaxy is a great tool. | easily do part-time: I don’t have | Time | to read the fine print on | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| aPvqvZlYEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | The cloud computing service with amazon described in the course is not free anymore. I was charged money for using it. The course also took much more time to complete than I wanted to spend. I believe a better design of the project could lead to a more efficient, less frustrating learning experience. Details below. The usegalaxy server was extremely slow. As shown in the course, I installed an instance of galaxy in the AWS/Amazon Cloud. I was under the impression that this was a free service for the first year. Amazon has changed its interfaces and I could not do the installation as recommended. But I managed to run a few analyses with some workarounds. I did not explicitely terminated the galaxy instance for ~ 6 days. Charges of $280 accumulated. The course project in week 4 was far beyond what was covered in the lectures. It took me a whole week, spending multiple hours every day. Many dead-end roads coupled with extremely long run times on the galaxy servers resulted in very inefficient learning and many frustrations. Help via the discussion forum was critical to design an analysis pipeline - so thank you Dejan and all contributors for the support. This is not a course I could easily do part-time: I don’t have time to read the fine print on what is available for free on Amazon, nor do I have time to go through all of the tools on galaxy to find out what would be the best for my analysis. On the positive side: I think Galaxy is a great tool. | on Amazon, nor do I have | Time | to go through all of the | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| asSgiHyvEeWpcQ7HugVD8Q | There are serious issues in the IT infrastructure for this Online Course. Coursera needs to upgrade their IT infrastructure for it to be real time. You may go through the threads in Help for more information and issues posted by other users. Apart from this, it is extremely difficult to communicate with someone in Coursera regarding anything and in any form, i.e email, live chat, etc. | infrastructure for it to be real | Time | You may go through the threads | Negative | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Interesting, and well worth my time... I only give it four stars as I am kinda stingy.. ;) | Interesting, and well worth my | Time | . . I only give it | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | The course material is mostly good if a bit basic at times. If the notes went a little more in depth, or the suggested resources were a little less bulky, it would be 5 stars. | good if a bit basic at | Time | If the notes went a little | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Really good course! Very much enjoyed it! Thank you for an amazing month! The only thing I would mention, was that at times the computer would sometime move the selected answer on the quiz, which made it frustrating on the last week's quiz and on week 2 (or 3 I think, can't remember it correctly) when it occurred, but apart from that everything else was fine! Thank you! | I would mention, was that at | Time | the computer would sometime move the | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | It took me a long time due to time limitation but happy to finish. I learned a lot and love to go back and listen to the lessons again and again. | It took me a long | Time | due to time limitation but happy | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | It took me a long time due to time limitation but happy to finish. I learned a lot and love to go back and listen to the lessons again and again. | me a long time due to | Time | limitation but happy to finish. I | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | In as much as I enjoyed the course at times the dialect was difficult. However, the reason for 4 stars as opposed to 5 stars is due to a lack of ability to have receive an answer to a difficult question answered by an instructor as opposed to another class participant who necessarily did not have any better grasp of the question than myself. Given that I certainly enjoyed the course overall. | as I enjoyed the course at | Time | the dialect was difficult. However, the | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | broken up over a slightly longer | Time | and the quizzes could be more | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | It was very interesting and of great relevance to many aspect of my fields of interest. They even had a special lecture on the philosophy of time travel that was a cherry on top of the cake! | special lecture on the philosophy of | Time | travel that was a cherry on | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | A nice and flexible course, in which you can explore the wide range of possibilities from the minimum basic level of subject to studying all the additional material and problematics. Rather interesting functional approach to the structure of philosophical knowledge. For the foreigners (as I am) the English is quite understandable (It is subtitled, but the subtitles are not necessary if you are above B2 / IELTS 7.0 level) and at the same time sufficiently sophisticated to acquire also some useful listening practice for academic IELTS / PTE Academic tests. | 0 level) and at the same | Time | sufficiently sophisticated to acquire also some | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Wonderful course! I especially enjoyed the Time Travel modules, as I am a huge science fiction fan. The instructors are informative and thought-provoking. | Wonderful course! I especially enjoyed the | Time | Travel modules, as I am a | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I have a mixed feeling about it. Sometimes I felt, this course was trying to deliver more content in short time. | to deliver more content in short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | This was a fantastic course! The content was very interesting, especially the section on time-travel, which I absolutely loved. I also liked that the course was perfectly manageable, unlike all the other MOOC's that I have attempted, where the time commitment turns out to be much bigger than expected. | that I have attempted, where the | Time | commitment turns out to be much | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| 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. | what I can tell from that | Time | The Forums are " there" and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 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. | the course) was not the best | Time | I am near the end of | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 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. | and have put a lot of | Time | effort and extra reading into it, | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| 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. | necessarily in the forums at the | Time | I cannot determine that for certain, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 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. | commented the final week touches upon | Time | travel and the professor has introduced | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I really enjoyed this course because contents were very interesting and contemporaneous. Reading about travelling time was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, quizzes and texts supported well my development. Congratulations. | interesting and contemporaneous. Reading about travelling | Time | was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Time of my life, thanks for the experience and everything | | Time | of my life, thanks for the | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Very good teaching strategy. Takes you through ideas and gives you examples. Has a couple of questions each video to keep your attention. It is a very interesting subject, even if the teaching was bad, but the lectures add even more by taking their time with concepts. Keep doing what you're doing. I would take other courses by this school if they were similarly designed. Thank you. | add even more by taking their | Time | with concepts. Keep doing what you're | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Great course touching on very interesting philosophical topics and arguments around them. Not all classes have the same level of clarity, and some of them brush past certain topics a bit too fast, but overall it's a great experience and totally worth one's time. Recommended to anyone who wants to think more about the way we think, and the world we live in. | great experience and totally worth one's | Time | Recommended to anyone who wants to | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | This course has taught me much in so little time, i'm truly looking forward to completing the entire course. | taught me much in so little | Time | i'm truly looking forward to completing | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Very good introductory course. Provides an overview of the different philosophical topics ranging from knowledge to time travel. | philosophical topics ranging from knowledge to | Time | travel. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | This was a very interesting course. Not what I was expecting when I enrolled, but I enjoyed it completely. I especially liked the lesson on the logical possibility of time travel. This was my first Coursera course but I hope to find more courses. | lesson on the logical possibility of | Time | travel. This was my first Coursera | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Course was great. I completed it at my own pace and enjoyed most subjects covered thoroughly. My favourite week was about Metaethics. I enjoyed it greatly and am continuing studying that in my spare time. The one complaint I would have is that I found it difficult to understand the lecturer covering scientific philosophy, as her accent was quite thick. | continuing studying that in my spare | Time | The one complaint I would have | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I found the course a little hard to follow mainly because the video lectures would not load. I found I spent more time trying to get the course material working than actually absorbing it. I really liked the lectures once they were working though. Its a very nice introduction to a way of thinking and the examples used to argument the theories were very entertaining. | load. I found I spent more | Time | trying to get the course material | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Excellent course, interesting topics, the instructors all teach in a clear but professional way. Thank you Professor Richmond for spending so much time helping us on the discussion boards! In the future, I would love it if there was more recommended reading, and not just strictly related to the topics in the lectures. Thank you very much! | Professor Richmond for spending so much | Time | helping us on the discussion boards! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I didn't find the overall content of the course very well chosen for an introduction to philosophy - since it covers so little. The title of this course should have been "An Introduction to Just a Couple of Topics in Philosophy." And there are so few philosophers covered. However, the biggest problem was instructor Alasdair Richmond, whose response to debate was locking threads down every time his ideological positions were challenged. He showed himself completely inept to have a debate with more than one course participant and chose to censor a variety of viewpoints he dislikes. It was particularly ironic to see an instructor exercise censorship in a Philosophy course - a domain whose objective, after all, is the pursuit of truth as well as to ask and debate the "why" of everything! A petty tyrant does not make a good teacher. Should I ever meet anyone interested in studying Philosophy, my first recommendation to them will be stay away from the University of Edinburgh, since there is no respect for debate, freedom of expression, or inquiry there. | debate was locking threads down every | Time | his ideological positions were challenged. He | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I think the selected topic were really interesting ones but since i´m not a scientifical backgrpund it was kind of difficult to follow some of the discussed concepts and ideas. And that was because not always these were explained from the very beginning and a lot of them were only mentioned, as it was supposed that we had to know them previously. Maybe with a little more time for the videos this would have been solved. In any case I really enjoyed it and I think it is important to have the opportunity to watch these courses and come to learn where are the stages of these matter. Thank you for the effort! | previously. Maybe with a little more | Time | for the videos this would have | Negative | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | This is a tough course. Tough because I had no experience in C or C++. My background is dot-net and visual basic. It's been study C++ 5 hours a day and take the course 2 hours a day. I made it. The professor is spot on when he says a C++ background is needed. But I made it. If you have the required background you'll find it's a good basis for understanding the multiple vulnerabilities in this code, what they are and how they work. (You better understand stacks and heaps and pointers real well) Worth the time and the effort. Cheers to University if Maryland for making it available and to Professor Hicks for his hard work. | and pointers real well) Worth the | Time | and the effort. Cheers to University | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | Great course, but not reasonable amount of time between quizzes attempts. 49 Days is too long time to wait if you fail in the quiz. | course, but not reasonable amount of | Time | between quizzes attempts. 49 Days is | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| aZysaaT7EeWiJhIfkgG__w | Great course, but not reasonable amount of time between quizzes attempts. 49 Days is too long time to wait if you fail in the quiz. | attempts. 49 Days is too long | Time | to wait if you fail in | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The level of this course is a lot higher than the other courses. The course contains a lot of material and exercises which makes it hard to finish the course within the time period of one month. Nevertheless did I like Brian's way of teaching. He's a perfectionist and takes his time to explain everything in detail. I really liked the challenge, 5 stars. | to finish the course within the | Time | period of one month. Nevertheless did | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The level of this course is a lot higher than the other courses. The course contains a lot of material and exercises which makes it hard to finish the course within the time period of one month. Nevertheless did I like Brian's way of teaching. He's a perfectionist and takes his time to explain everything in detail. I really liked the challenge, 5 stars. | He's a perfectionist and takes his | Time | to explain everything in detail. I | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Should cover a lot of dfificuties when the model assumptions are violated and should be for a longer time or having a second course about this theme. | and should be for a longer | Time | or having a second course about | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The professor doesn't explain clearly as part of the videos is his correcting himself or saying the same thing two or three times. And why must the videos show the teacher? It distracts from the slides and seeing him move doesn't help understand anything better Concepts like VIF or hat values are not very well explained by the teacher, at least the SWIRL lesson explains it correctly. ANOVA and ANCOVA are mentioned in the description but they aren't explained anywhere. ANOVA is used without any explanation of what it is. I found myself searching online for other sources to understand the concepts. | the same thing two or three | Time | And why must the videos show | Negative | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I like this course a lot because it solidified my understanding of regression. I have often read about regression when reading scientific articles however, i never took the time to really investigate the mechanics on how it is done. Thanks to this course i can now appreciate better the journals that i read. Furthermore, the course project for this course was quite interesting, not too hard, and was bit challenging. There was plenty of time to finish the project and some extra time to make it even better than a simple submission that meets the basic requirements of the course. Thanks to the my classmates and the nice people in Coursera and R, i had a great time learning during this course. | articles however, i never took the | Time | to really investigate the mechanics on | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I like this course a lot because it solidified my understanding of regression. I have often read about regression when reading scientific articles however, i never took the time to really investigate the mechanics on how it is done. Thanks to this course i can now appreciate better the journals that i read. Furthermore, the course project for this course was quite interesting, not too hard, and was bit challenging. There was plenty of time to finish the project and some extra time to make it even better than a simple submission that meets the basic requirements of the course. Thanks to the my classmates and the nice people in Coursera and R, i had a great time learning during this course. | bit challenging. There was plenty of | Time | to finish the project and some | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I like this course a lot because it solidified my understanding of regression. I have often read about regression when reading scientific articles however, i never took the time to really investigate the mechanics on how it is done. Thanks to this course i can now appreciate better the journals that i read. Furthermore, the course project for this course was quite interesting, not too hard, and was bit challenging. There was plenty of time to finish the project and some extra time to make it even better than a simple submission that meets the basic requirements of the course. Thanks to the my classmates and the nice people in Coursera and R, i had a great time learning during this course. | finish the project and some extra | Time | to make it even better than | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I like this course a lot because it solidified my understanding of regression. I have often read about regression when reading scientific articles however, i never took the time to really investigate the mechanics on how it is done. Thanks to this course i can now appreciate better the journals that i read. Furthermore, the course project for this course was quite interesting, not too hard, and was bit challenging. There was plenty of time to finish the project and some extra time to make it even better than a simple submission that meets the basic requirements of the course. Thanks to the my classmates and the nice people in Coursera and R, i had a great time learning during this course. | and R, i had a great | Time | learning during this course. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The instructor is at time incomprehensible. It would be helpful to speak more slowly and pause more often. Otherwise he sounds like repeating something that he's so well memorized after many years of teaching. | The instructor is at | Time | incomprehensible. It would be helpful to | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | This course is the first one in the Data Science series to lapse in terms of the clarity of the lectures, and the sense of cohesiveness of the material. Brian Caffo's lectures in Statistical Inference were good; in this course they seem to veer left and right rather than get straight to the essence of whatever subject he is lecturing about. A more structured final project would have been helpful. The instructions on this project weren't quite so blunt as to say "Take this data set, do some regression-y stuff and come back with something about these two variables," but that's basically as far as our instructions went. It could have been a great learning experience to have a more detailed guide through the construction of a regression analysis, but instead an assignment which was 40% of our grade was put together as an afterthought. It was the assignment equivalent of stopping in the 7-11 a block away from a birthday party to buy a card. Also, in terms of delivering the content: Mr. Caffo needs to structure his slide/video arrangements so that he is not standing in front of the text. Think of it from the point of view of somebody wanting to listen and read at the same time. | listen and read at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.84 | 2.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The course content was very brief and well structured, Regression being a rather vast topic demands a lot more time. 4 weeks seemed a bit less! Overall satisfied by what the course offered. | vast topic demands a lot more | Time | 4 weeks seemed a bit less! | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | As for the Statistical Inference course, this course is amazing but is presented in a more complex way than it should be. Once again the concepts are simple and the math not so hard, yet I had to do a lot of research outside the course to be able to understand these simple concepts and derive the not so hard mathematics. Brian Caffo is clearly brilliant and, I would say, seem to be a good lad too, but something is missing. Too often the details are thrown at us without being properly framed in the context or without having the proper concept being introduced progressively. I have a theory about teaching since I was 15, and so far it has proven to be true. Imagine that learning is about climbing a mountain in which tall steps have been carved. Each step is taller than the student. The teacher is somewhere higher than the students (not necessarily at the top, if there is such a thing). The job of the teacher is to throw boxes (concepts) and balls (details) of different size, shape and colors. The job of the student is to catch these boxes and balls and to put the right balls in the right boxes in order to make a staircase out of it to climb (at least) one of the giant stair up. A good teacher makes sure to throw the concepts first than the details and to clearly specify which balls go into which box, as well as which boxes go inside/over which other boxes. But most teacher simply throw the balls and boxes in an not so well structured manner, so the poor students try to catch as many as he can, but also miss a lot of them. His hands can hold a limited amount of balls. If he doesn't have the right box to put them, he would either miss the next balls, or put the one he hold in his hand in the wrong box. Bottom line, the best teachers are those who focus on the concepts (and context) and make sure that the concepts are well understood before introducing details to stuck in these concepts. From my experience our brain (or at least mine) better learn this way. It is as if our brain need first to establish a category-pattern (the concept/context) to which it will associate detail-patterns. But without a proper category-pattern, our brain is having a hard time to properly remember the detail-patterns or miss-associate them to the wrong category-pattern (which create even more confusion). Hope it was helpful somehow... | our brain is having a hard | Time | to properly remember the detail-patterns or | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | I find it very tough to understand everything. Buying the course book helps to overcome this. You have to dedicate a lot of time. | have to dedicate a lot of | Time | | Negative | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | It would be helpful if the reading materials had recommended chapters from the textbook that we were asked to download. While it it helpful to have the text book the course is entirely passable without the use of the text, what I caused for me is heavy reliance on the videos and recommended reading material because it consumed less time but then I still feel that there is a bit more I could have learnt. So I suggest using chapters from the recommended text book as well to broaden the knowledge of students who are quite new to Digital Analytics like myself. | reading material because it consumed less | Time | but then I still feel that | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | I appreciate this course and the instructor's time, but so far I haven't really learned anything. The structure of every lesson is: "1. Here are the 5 things we're going to cover. 2. Name (not explain) those 5 things. 3. Here are the 5 things we covered" I think there's a lot of potential for this course in the long run. I would advise having a professor from Illinois who is not in the business school take this course and get their feedback. I believe the instructor is very smart and experienced in this area, so this is definitely a course that could grow into a Coursera essential. | appreciate this course and the instructor's | Time | but so far I haven't really | Positive | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| 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. | lectures can be quite dull at | Time | - especially later on in the | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| 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. | on in the course when substantial | Time | is spent plugging numbers into the | Negative | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| 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. | the same expressions 3 or 4 | Time | Beginners will probably be better off | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| BK2bam0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | This course teach us basic knowledges about writing emails. Such knowledges are essential to get success in a right communication. Many times we forget them and committed various silly mistakes unnecessarily. It's an excellent course. | success in a right communication. Many | Time | we forget them and committed various | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| BK2bam0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | Very good course. Full of useful details. Only thing is at times Mr. Landers was uncomfortable in front of the camera and that made me uncomfortable too. Other than that it was pretty good. Thank you, Teo. | useful details. Only thing is at | Time | Mr. Landers was uncomfortable in front | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| BK2bam0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | Peer review on this specific course is at times not the best choice | on this specific course is at | Time | not the best choice | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| BK2bam0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | I learned many different ways to improve my overall email communication and I am really thankful to the course instructor Gerry Landers for his time and efforts. | course instructor Gerry Landers for his | Time | and efforts. | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | Fantastic course with a great professor. I loved the way Prof Rolf weaved the different practical perspectives into the story line while relating to the relevant aspects of management theory. The choice of topics, the different stories used to illustrate the concepts and the story line all make a fascinating course well worth my time. If you want to experience a different perspective of some of the traditional management theories, have a go at this and you really won't be dissapointed. | a fascinating course well worth my | Time | If you want to experience a | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | hand after doing the quizzes some | Time | and observing the considered right and | Positive | 0.79 | 2.0 |
| BPkiQyWcEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Very conversational and informative. Glad to spend my time and money here. | and informative. Glad to spend my | Time | and money here. | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| BPkiQyWcEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Real hands-on course! Got to know so much and now it's time to practice! | know so much and now it's | Time | to practice! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| BPkiQyWcEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | If you get confused every time you open the font selection dialog then this course is for you. It well structured has a lot of visuals. I highly recommend this course. | If you get confused every | Time | you open the font selection dialog | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | the whole waste of time and energy | the whole waste of | Time | and energy | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | Learning finance with Prof. Kaul was so much fun. Loved the anecdotes, and the bits and pieces of elderly advice interwoven into the course lectures. The course content as well as assignments were well structured, and had the right level of difficulty. I must admit that the difficulty level for the assignments was higher than what I had expected, and it took some time to figure out how to apply the concepts learned in class to the real world problems in the assignments. But I am glad this was the case, because that kept me on my toes. Thank you Prof. Kaul and Coursera for this awesome class, and for rekindling my passion for Finance. | had expected, and it took some | Time | to figure out how to apply | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | The lectures are good, but in the assignments he asks for tasks that are not at all explained in the videos. For a beginner's course it is way too difficult and time consuming. | it is way too difficult and | Time | consuming. | Negative | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | Great course. Instructor takes time to explain the concepts in detail. Assignments are really good! | Great course. Instructor takes | Time | to explain the concepts in detail. | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | I will completely recommend this course. Although I have some financial background confirmed with my degree and equity broker license (authorized by financial authority in Poland), this course gave me more deeper understanding of what is going on time value of money. Gautam Kaul is fantastic teacher and his explanations and examples are very practical and solid. I am very grateful for his hard work and hope, that he won't stop giving his knowledge to the world, along with his teaching assistants and staff. | understanding of what is going on | Time | value of money. Gautam Kaul is | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | this is an amazing way to learn about the different transformations that has the money across the time. Surely this is a course that everyone should take. Thank you very much Coursera! | that has the money across the | Time | Surely this is a course that | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | I love this course. I feel smarter all ready and it has only been the 1st week. LOL. Thank you for giving this for "free". My time is well spent. | this for " free" . My | Time | is well spent. | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | The Worst Course EVER on Coursera: It is important to realize at the outset that I am a very avid learner and always give everything a chance to be completely tried out before giving a judgement, and unfortunately, this course is by far, the only bad course I've encountered on Coursera for the following reasons: 1- The professor wastes a whole week's module on explaining something trivial like the interest rate and compound interest rate without naming the necessary terminology that is commonly used. 2- To make things worse, he has a condescending perspective on students and wastes so much time glorifying himself in an upsetting manner that patronizes learners. 3- His demeanour is unprofessional and quite disturbing when he gives mentions at the end of the week that 'I can feel you. I can feel each one of you now' to the degree that even the camera-person filming him cuts his nonsense out. 4- After putting up with all his boring nonsense that I already know, despite being a linguist not a finance person, I gave him a chance and started doing his first 10-question Quiz, which was completely isolated from reality and unrelated to his course material or teaching. 5- All questions were boring and calculation-intensive, and I still gave him and a chance and went through the whole boring set of 10 questions just to tell me that it needs upgrading for such a banal and facile course. Now, I have an idea about the level of Teaching at Michigan University and I will recommend all my friends not to attend such a university due to the previously-mentioned reasons. A complete waste of space. | on students and wastes so much | Time | glorifying himself in an upsetting manner | Negative | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | While Professor Kaul's enthusiasm and passion for finance is inspiring, his lectures are not entirely helpful come time to face assignments. He often rambles through the material, spending more time talking about his life rather than the material at hand. When he decides to finally talk about the material, it presented in a disorganized and confusing fashion. If he developed a disciplined schedule with material that was on par with the assignments, this course would not have been nearly as frustrating; challenging assignments, I agree, are crucial for learning the material well. I just wish I didn't have to spend more time browsing the internet finding material pertinent to answering his arbitrarily open-ended questions. | lectures are not entirely helpful come | Time | to face assignments. He often rambles | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | While Professor Kaul's enthusiasm and passion for finance is inspiring, his lectures are not entirely helpful come time to face assignments. He often rambles through the material, spending more time talking about his life rather than the material at hand. When he decides to finally talk about the material, it presented in a disorganized and confusing fashion. If he developed a disciplined schedule with material that was on par with the assignments, this course would not have been nearly as frustrating; challenging assignments, I agree, are crucial for learning the material well. I just wish I didn't have to spend more time browsing the internet finding material pertinent to answering his arbitrarily open-ended questions. | rambles through the material, spending more | Time | talking about his life rather than | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Bq5Eo50bEeW_wArffOXkOw | While Professor Kaul's enthusiasm and passion for finance is inspiring, his lectures are not entirely helpful come time to face assignments. He often rambles through the material, spending more time talking about his life rather than the material at hand. When he decides to finally talk about the material, it presented in a disorganized and confusing fashion. If he developed a disciplined schedule with material that was on par with the assignments, this course would not have been nearly as frustrating; challenging assignments, I agree, are crucial for learning the material well. I just wish I didn't have to spend more time browsing the internet finding material pertinent to answering his arbitrarily open-ended questions. | I didn't have to spend more | Time | browsing the internet finding material pertinent | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Excellent intro course, but not without issues. In general, pro's include reasonable length lectures, provided by _the_ leading expert in the field, and designer of the Scala language. Focus on functional programming techniques versus syntax nuance is a significant benefit - Scala is easy to get bogged down in. Pro's also include the fact that lectures have had at least some amount of post-production work done, and manage to make voiceover/slides/whiteboard consistent and coherent better than most similar online classes/tutorials. The assignments are reasonable, and the time estimates of ~3 hrs each was about right on the average, at least in my case (senior programmer with deep background in C/C++, and just enough Java to be dangerous and dislike boilerplate). Some drawbacks - there was no clear segue from "basic syntax" to "collections framework". That's _IMPORTANT_. In 20/20 hindsight, I would have benefitted from a big, bold slide before the first mention of "foreach" that said "stop here, go to the text, and skim the chapters on collections for 'foreach' and other common operations. This is a building block for everything to follow, and NOT unique to just lists." The major factor keeping this from being a '5' in my mind were that the assignments didn't always make sense as written, and I had to go back and forth between the assignment writeup, the source code and the test cases to really sort out what was required. The assignments could become _much_ more effective if they were provided with more test cases, including expected FAILURE cases and not just bare minimal acceptance cases. | The assignments are reasonable, and the | Time | estimates of ~3 hrs each was | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | High level course. Exercises are academic of nature. You might need more time to finish the exercises. I appreciate that this is a well formed course. | of nature. You might need more | Time | to finish the exercises. I appreciate | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Good course, learnt quite a lot even as someone with some existing experience of Scala. The exercises were challenging but not too difficult and the estimated completion time is pretty much spot on. Just a shame that the automatic grader and verification systems are less than reliable on some of the exercises. | too difficult and the estimated completion | Time | is pretty much spot on. Just | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Tremendous course. Explanations can be terse at times, especially after going over quizzes (where you may only follow what is going along if you successfully solved the quiz, otherwise you may miss important insight), but on the whole, lectures are very strong and help you gain a working understanding of functional programming. The assignments are carefully crafted and really give you an opportunity to try the stuff from the lecture. Definitely felt like I learned a lot during the assignments. I found that the last two assignments took more than the recommended 3 hours (closer to 5-6 for me), so plan accordingly. Personally, I found that this course is even better if you read through the first 4 chapters of Functional Programming in Scala (https://www.manning.com/books/functional-programming-in-scala) before doing this course. By getting two separate, excellent explanations for the same topics, I was able to understand the material much better than just from one. | course. Explanations can be terse at | Time | especially after going over quizzes (where | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The course is worth learning. It is interesting and challenging. Even though I needed more time than one session to complete the course because of some of the assignments, I don't think that they should be made easier. | challenging. Even though I needed more | Time | than one session to complete the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Very interesting and quite challenging at times. It's not a beginner course, you need a solid understanding of recursion (which is all over the place), knowledge of some basic data structures might help too (e.g. binary trees), knowning some Java would help too for obvious reasons (data types, generics etc.). Some of the concepts are really mind-bending, mostly because a lot of us are not used to this type of programming. I highly recommend the course and also the companion book (by prof. Odersky) for deeper look into the Scala guts. | Very interesting and quite challenging at | Time | It's not a beginner course, you | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The material was fantastic, but the lectures seemed to be a bit basic in comparison to the actual coding assignments. Even after understanding the martial covered in the lectures it felt at times as if the coding assignments were drafted against an entirely unrelated topic (or at least by someone with a completely different approach). | in the lectures it felt at | Time | as if the coding assignments were | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Pace of progression of concepts was just right. You may need to spend more time with the course than what is suggested. I found myself spending more than 3hrs on the assignments consistently. | You may need to spend more | Time | with the course than what is | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The content is great! But the rearrangement of lectures is not synced with intros at the beginning of some videos. I know it takes a lot of time and effort to make or alter a video. After all it doesn't affect much. | know it takes a lot of | Time | and effort to make or alter | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | This course is a little bit difficult to get started with if you do not have any code experience. However, it is a really great course because the content is sufficient but not too much and the course is clear enough. The last two assignments are tough for me and they took me a long time to figure out, also I read a number of materials about Scala functions on Internet. This is the first course that I finished and I really like this course. | and they took me a long | Time | to figure out, also I read | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| 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! | I really noticed the jump of | Time | invested for the last assignment. I | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Interesting and challenging course, thoroughly and consistently explained. Examples and live coding were also quite helpful. Only small con: it did feel at times that this course was just a "repackaging" of the original one. Would recommend. | small con: it did feel at | Time | that this course was just a | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Excellent course, really interesting. Progressive assignments. Sometimes it is needed to spend more time in some lectures ( a little theory) | it is needed to spend more | Time | in some lectures ( a little | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | I think this course can lead any programmer into a larger and beautiful way for functional programming paradigm. I think this course was quite difficult for me due to lack of experience with FP. Also, I have no professional experience with FP and besides my Java 8 certification, it does not fulfill all the requirements for doing this course in a smoother way. I think it should be done in 7 weeks (not 6) because of the time required to watch all videos and get some time to absorb it all and do some practice. | weeks (not 6) because of the | Time | required to watch all videos and | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | I think this course can lead any programmer into a larger and beautiful way for functional programming paradigm. I think this course was quite difficult for me due to lack of experience with FP. Also, I have no professional experience with FP and besides my Java 8 certification, it does not fulfill all the requirements for doing this course in a smoother way. I think it should be done in 7 weeks (not 6) because of the time required to watch all videos and get some time to absorb it all and do some practice. | watch all videos and get some | Time | to absorb it all and do | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | The course is logical and thorough, flawlessly delivered (well, except maybe the audio quality at times), and challenging just enough to make a seasoned imperative programmer scream in frustration, but not quit. 😀 The only thing standing between this course and perfection are the pop quiz bugs. But even they contribute to the message of the course in a way: if Coursera's platform were written in Scala, there probably would be fewer of them. 🕷 | except maybe the audio quality at | Time | and challenging just enough to make | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Specially on the last exercise, there is a bit of a distance between the classes and the challenges. Other than that, the course provides a very good introduction to functional programming at the same time as it introduce the scala language constructs and api. | to functional programming at the same | Time | as it introduce the scala language | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | Lectures were very clear and the topics were explained very well. The assignments were quite challenging and did take some time but, on completion, they were extremely rewarding and worth all of the effort. | quite challenging and did take some | Time | but, on completion, they were extremely | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| bRPXgjY9EeW6RApRXdjJPw | I am a statistician who works primarily with R, with some Python for the things Python is better for. I know how to program, but I explicitly note I am not a computer science student. I have only limited experience with the command prompt. I was very excited when I heard about this course, but the amount of work and frustration just to get started programming in Scala has been obscene. I am very, very glad I decided to check out the course for free before paying for the specialization. The course has a lot of required software. The tutorials to get this software often involve "You need this, but so save time we're going to skip showing you how to get it. If it doesn't work, you need to install it." There is a lot of variability in OSs. Many errors are often encountered. There is no help. Among the things the course requires are two (three?) IDEs for Scala (I note the video tutorials says you just need some sort of IDE... but you need IntelliJ, and Eclipse to submit...). The guides show how to get started on a Mac. The software is not the same on Windows, and so 'step by step instructions' become a guessing game, because many options or menus are missing or different. There are many better and more friendly guides on the internet. I may return to the transcripts of the course content here, but I won't be submitting any coursework. I'm going to warn my colleagues away as well. Forget Coursera - I'll just buy a book and work through it like everyone else I know. | You need this, but so save | Time | we're going to skip showing you | Negative | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Possibly a bit too simple for an advanced English learner. However, first time ever to complete a business plan writing. Pride of myself! | an advanced English learner. However, first | Time | ever to complete a business plan | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | I am in love for this course. Unfortunately, in the first week I did not had much time to study and know I am late, but I will certainly catch up rhythm. | week I did not had much | Time | to study and know I am | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | I haven't learned this course yet and this is my first time to use Coursera .I have learned course one ,part one .I feel excellent and I think this course can help me ,Thanks! | yet and this is my first | Time | to use Coursera . I have | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | It's very cool to learn 2 favorite subjects of all time at the same time! I will do my best for this course | learn 2 favorite subjects of all | Time | at the same time! I will | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | It's very cool to learn 2 favorite subjects of all time at the same time! I will do my best for this course | of all time at the same | Time | I will do my best for | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| bTYGrDVuEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I thought there will be more on interfaces and views. Not really "Best practices in interface design" course. But it is good in Core Data and UITableViews. Worth time. Change name! :-) | in Core Data and UITableViews. Worth | Time | Change name! :-) | Positive | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| bTYGrDVuEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I'm learning a lot in this class. I actually decided it was worth paying for. Thanks for making it $49 instead of $79. I think the videos are really helpful for explaining confusing concepts. The assignments were simple enough to make me not quit but challenging enough for a brand new iOS developer to have to spend some time on them to learn. | developer to have to spend some | Time | on them to learn. | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| bTYGrDVuEeW6RApRXdjJPw | Great learning time | Great learning | Time | | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| bu-bs9_HEeSNQCIAC2-J5Q | Challenging at times, but doable with effort, and quite rewarding upon success. Recommended. | Challenging at | Time | but doable with effort, and quite | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| BuO0neR5EeWYOBIRup69HQ | Good course for general knowledge of the subject. I felt the amount of reading, especially the 4th week, should be more accurately represented. At least for time management. | more accurately represented. At least for | Time | management. | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| BuO0neR5EeWYOBIRup69HQ | A very informative course in the sense that though its very basic but its the first time I got everything in a structured way. I am already a Infosec professional however my domain is not mobility. So mobility with security and its use business development is a phenomenal task. Hence, I guess its a very good course for this specialisation. I am not giving 5 stars as there is always scope for improvement. However, it may be taken as a five star course. Thanks to all the people who designed the course. | very basic but its the first | Time | I got everything in a structured | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | 100% worth your time ! Astronomy is my passion, and I wanted to apply my knowledge elsewhere while at the same time enhancing my understanding for the subject. I hope to do some form of Astronomy/Astrophysics course at university and this online course has been perfect in helping me to discuss my extra work/reading around the subject. | 100% worth your | Time | ! Astronomy is my passion, and | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | 100% worth your time ! Astronomy is my passion, and I wanted to apply my knowledge elsewhere while at the same time enhancing my understanding for the subject. I hope to do some form of Astronomy/Astrophysics course at university and this online course has been perfect in helping me to discuss my extra work/reading around the subject. | knowledge elsewhere while at the same | Time | enhancing my understanding for the subject. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | Very interesting. Professor Murayama explains really well lots of things with... few times. This course is very intensive but so interesting. If you like astronomy you cannot miss this one! | of things with. . . few | Time | This course is very intensive but | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | Great course, keep going and thanks for your time to explain all this things | keep going and thanks for your | Time | to explain all this things | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | From the Big Bang to Dark Energy A very interesting survey of the universe from the big bang to the possible future of the universe. Professor Hitoshi Murayama presents the course in a very unassuming and welcoming manner. The idea of dark matter is explained in the problem of galaxy rotation speed, and the idea of dark energy is introduced to explain the strange idea that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. The idea of discovery of Higgs, dark matter, Cosmic background radiation and atom formation related to the time history of the universe is also introduced. Future telescope/spectroscopic experiments are given in the last lecture, and can be further looked at on the web with more understanding from this course. | and atom formation related to the | Time | history of the universe is also | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | Excellent course. One of the best. Related complex subject matter in a understandable way for those who have some basic background in this area. I took this course twice. Liked it better the second time. Highly recommended. | twice. Liked it better the second | Time | Highly recommended. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | A waste of time. | A waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| bV6GUWEbEeSceSIACy-PDA | It gives a very concise picture of astronomy in a very short time. Many of my concepts are now much more clear after taking this course. A great course and very well organized and presented. I really enjoyed it. | of astronomy in a very short | Time | Many of my concepts are now | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| bvroJANGEeaJMgqy4cb6jQ | Lessons and videos in this class have been very well crafted and created. The lessons are both entertaining and informative at the same time. Good job ASU Teach English Now! Team! | entertaining and informative at the same | Time | Good job ASU Teach English Now! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| bzhAuJ9sEeWJORITtzkPnQ | The course is a wonderful But the idea of a peer and the final assignment a very bad You need to wait ... for several days and a waste of your time in order to be assessed by other people These people may be incompetent and give you a zero for no reason And lost your effort and your time | days and a waste of your | Time | in order to be assessed by | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| bzhAuJ9sEeWJORITtzkPnQ | The course is a wonderful But the idea of a peer and the final assignment a very bad You need to wait ... for several days and a waste of your time in order to be assessed by other people These people may be incompetent and give you a zero for no reason And lost your effort and your time | And lost your effort and your | Time | | Negative | 0.87 | 1.0 |
| bzhAuJ9sEeWJORITtzkPnQ | This course and the professor was definitely worth spending time on and learning from. For those that are looking for more certificate, I believe London Business School has a good name, the course title and course knowledge is strong. My rating 10 out 10 and can't wait for the next one. | the professor was definitely worth spending | Time | on and learning from. For those | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The content of the course was good. Lectures were effective. I specially liked the last statement after every lecture "where ever you may be have a great time" | you may be have a great | Time | | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The teacher of this course talks toooo fast ! I`m for example a french educated student, so I prefer to take courses with a teacher who talks in a comprehensive way in which I can understand everything he says in order to proceed in my work and then to benefit everything in this course. Concerning the quiz, in the all of the quiz there is questions not related to what already said from the teacher or in the articles required to read. I red the articles coupes of time but in a specific questions, the answers, it seems, that we should answer from our own memory because badly it`s not mentioned in any article or in the video of the teacher. Thanks | I red the articles coupes of | Time | but in a specific questions, the | Negative | 0.71 | 3.0 |
| C-Eq4BUkEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Excellent. If this course is given again I will take it for credit. So sorry I didn't do it the first time. | I didn't do it the first | Time | | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| C-Eq4BUkEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The lecturer was excellent and not only expounded in depth, Soren Kierkegaard's thinking and ideas, he put them into there relevant context in addition to delving into the differences he had with his contemporary thinkers. Furthermore the Professor asked thought provoking questions that allowed the viewer to think and reflect how Kierkegaard's ideas are relevant in our time and our lives. | Kierkegaard's ideas are relevant in our | Time | and our lives. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| C-Eq4BUkEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Beautiful description of the life, times, ideas, and love of Socrates that Kierkegaard embodied. A real joy to run through. I literally watched all the lectures in the span of three days, there is something simple and earnest about the course that I really like. I like that the quizzes never took away from the lesson, they only check understanding at the end of the lecture. | Beautiful description of the life, | Time | ideas, and love of Socrates that | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| c8dPVxUQEeWpKw4zIcjkHw | Great course. Very practical and challenging at the same time. It helps you to become focused and gives you tools to plan your life or what you want to do. | practical and challenging at the same | Time | It helps you to become focused | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | This course is awesome. Jim Fowler is very good teacher. His explanations are concise, but very easy to assimilate because of all the visual resources. I loved the fact that the videos were short overall, since I do not have much free time to keep watching slow long videos. A perfect score. | I do not have much free | Time | to keep watching slow long videos. | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | The best course about mathematics that I've ever taken. The course is very interesant, the videos are very well done, the activities and quizzes are very challenging. I had seen sequences and series a time ago and I didn't like them at all, but now it is a complete different story. I really enjoyed this course and I recommend it. | had seen sequences and series a | Time | ago and I didn't like them | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | In my case I listened to all courses as a refresher of things that I learned in college about 25 years ago. It felt great to solve problems that I have not had a chance to do for a long time. I relived my college days in the process I gained a new insight that I can use in my current job as a EE. | chance to do for a long | Time | I relived my college days in | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Excellent course. Very well taylored and fun. Worth the time spent. | well taylored and fun. Worth the | Time | spent. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| cdBWwMNwEeS3kiIACx2NTg | Great course but should have time to study because it requires intensive study for beginner or non science stream students. Anyway, thank you all lecturers in this course. Cheers, Banly | Great course but should have | Time | to study because it requires intensive | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | A course graded only by your peers ! what's the point ? Well the peers that graded my answers are not qualified to grade my work, useless, wast of time grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. | grade my work, useless, wast of | Time | grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Not good- weak lecturer- repeats himself endlessly- waste of time | lecturer- repeats himself endlessly- waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Stunning waste of time. There is nothing of substance. | Stunning waste of | Time | There is nothing of substance. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | First time, ı said what am ı suppose to do with that, and then noticed, people and companies cares this tech whole over the world. This is just the beginning. keep doing keep learning . We will change our world, together! | First | Time | ı said what am ı suppose | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Course address some elementary issues about IoT, but the instructor at times seems like he does not have a good grasp of the lecture materials. No access to quizzes or evaluations as auditing participant, which is a shame since most of the Coursera MOOCs allow access to evaluation material under the auditing modality. | about IoT, but the instructor at | Time | seems like he does not have | Negative | 0.72 | 2.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | This will probably be the worst course in the specialization and for good reason. The entire course is designed to overload you with terminology to get you up to speed for the follow courses. As a result this is a pretty bland and boring 4 weeks. The assignments feel like tedious filler an a lot of the questions in them are very poorly worded. The saving grace is that the course is just 4 weeks and can be completed in a fairly short amount of time. | in a fairly short amount of | Time | | Negative | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | The explanation is very good and effective.Real time examples are explained well. | is very good and effective. Real | Time | examples are explained well. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Nice overview of the IOT with lot of real time examples. | the IOT with lot of real | Time | examples. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I've been working as a backend programmer for quite some time now. I have experience with languages such as PHP, Python, Java, however, it's been two years since I last programmed in javascript. This course helped me get back to it, with the overall experience being more than excellent. Great course, but if you already have experience with JS, then this isn't for you. It's entry level. | a backend programmer for quite some | Time | now. I have experience with languages | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Not for beginners unless ready to spend lots of extra hours watching the videos several times and surfing on the web to get additional information | extra hours watching the videos several | Time | and surfing on the web to | Positive | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I think this course does a pretty good of introducing JavaScript. It covers the essentials of how to create functions and implement event handlers that react to the users, which is the most common use of JS. As an introductory course, it correctly assumes some of its audience has no prior programming background. However, it is difficult to teach programming in such a short time. As an experienced programmer, I would recommend reviewing the order in which some of the concepts are presented to try to help in this aspect. I was personally hoping that the final assignment would be a bit more challenging, but it was very straightforward. Form handling (the topic in the final week) is certainly where I've used JS the most during my career, so I was glad that it was given special attention. Again, this is a really good course for beginners; Dr. Van Lent is awesome. | teach programming in such a short | Time | As an experienced programmer, I would | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Really good course just like all the previous courses in the specialisation. The professor took time to explain and introduce important concepts in JavaScript programming. | in the specialisation. The professor took | Time | to explain and introduce important concepts | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very good explanations ! I wish I learned with this class when I learned JS for the first time ! | I learned JS for the first | Time | ! | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| CJs0DTk_EeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Good course if you want to learn how JavaScript works with HTML and CSS elements to make site pages more engaging but don't have a lot of time for lengthy lectures or assignments that take hours. There's room for the course to grow though. There's so much more a web designer can do with JavaScript to manipulate the DOM and provide a great experience for a site user, and I feel the instructor fell short in explaining event handlers and other cool animation trends seen in the industry. But I understand that this is for new web designers who may or may not be completely interested in programming as opposed to front-end design, so Colleen's teaching provides a good balance. Love the fact that the lectures are straight to the point. I was able to finish 4 weeks of material in less than 3 days, which for someone busy like me, is awesome! | but don't have a lot of | Time | for lengthy lectures or assignments that | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Really interesting course. I recommend it to anyone curios about working with animals. This course made me seriously concidering working as a veterinary assistant in the future, I will look at the possibilites of part time studies to achieve this, | look at the possibilites of part | Time | studies to achieve this, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | A fascinating overview of anatomy, diagnosis, soft skills, the history and future of veterinary learning and medicine - I loved it and used every possible minute I could spare to watch the lectures. I loved it and wish I could come study full time at the Royal Dick Vet. | wish I could come study full | Time | at the Royal Dick Vet. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| Cn3HgzTdEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Many thanks to our professor for taking the time to patiently explain and describe PR's key elements, giving numerous examples and giving a rich overview. As I strongly enjoyed the course I will be continue with followup lessons. However, regarding improvements I would have preferred written assignments instead of Quizzes as they were too 'easy' to pass. Also, PR being a field which requires strong written skills, I would have liked to improve this. | to our professor for taking the | Time | to patiently explain and describe PR's | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Cn3HgzTdEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | A good intro to PR , but course material seemed somewhat redundant and lacked challenge at times. Professor's enthusiasm and passion was contagious and greatly appreciated. | somewhat redundant and lacked challenge at | Time | Professor's enthusiasm and passion was contagious | Positive | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| Cn3HgzTdEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This course is pure gold for anyone interested in Public Relations. As a PR practicioner, I've seen a lot of books and materials on PR, and nearly not any of them considered such a broad and at the same time so easy to follow range of topics as this course does. Professor Dutta is a true PR Professional, both in theoretical and practical aspects of Public Relations. Be sure, by the end of the course you will know everything you need to understand PR practice. | a broad and at the same | Time | so easy to follow range of | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Cn3HgzTdEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | An excellent course in all respects - I learned a lot about the nature of Public Relations in a very short period of time. This has been a great foundation upon which my future studies in this realm will build. Thank you Professor Dutta and NUS. Regards from Toronto! GA | in a very short period of | Time | This has been a great foundation | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very Much Useful to Student Community, particularly when these are given in form of assignments to student groups. the videos are interesting at the same time it gives a joy of Fun Learning | videos are interesting at the same | Time | it gives a joy of Fun | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Teaches a lot, but is super easy to understand at the same time. | easy to understand at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | You should tell people before they enroll that, to take the quizzes, they must pay. It was a waste of time... | pay. It was a waste of | Time | . . | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | It's an EXCELLENT COURSE!! Made my time so worthy and learnt-full. Thank you, Tamy Chapman, Instructor of the course! | an EXCELLENT COURSE! ! Made my | Time | so worthy and learnt-full. Thank you, | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | The course is really exhaustive and, at the same time, simple. | really exhaustive and, at the same | Time | simple. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Even if you are fluent a review is always helpful to remind you why things are done a certain way. If you are not rusty, it should take you no time to finish. But if you are rusty in some area, and just don't realize it, this will point to where the problem may be and fix it. | rusty, it should take you no | Time | to finish. But if you are | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | A very weak course, gives very little knowledge of grammar, doesn't really explain quite a lot of things. If you are a first year primary school student, this course might be helpful, otherwise a complete waste of time. | helpful, otherwise a complete waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | It is my first time to start taking online classes, I really like it ! | It is my first | Time | to start taking online classes, I | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Many tips in this course are very good and important. I missed some of them before and this course help me pay attention to them and learn them clearly. I highly recommended to you and I won't take you much time. | and I won't take you much | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | It's really easy to follow instructions and well structured. It is a great tool that do not take you much time to complete assignments and helps you to learn in a positive way. | that do not take you much | Time | to complete assignments and helps you | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Highly recommended for anyone looking to improve their grammar and punctuation. Although the course covers a broad area, it doesn't take too much time to finish. Simple and precise. | area, it doesn't take too much | Time | to finish. Simple and precise. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | The terminology is likely to be difficult for ESLs, and the guidance is likely too easy for native speakers. Spent most of the time on 2.0x speed and multitasking because it wasn't nuanced enough. | native speakers. Spent most of the | Time | on 2. 0x speed and multitasking | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This course is great. The easy to follow lectures allows students to grasp the material with wasting a lot of time. In addition, students will be will be about to use their new found knowledge as soon as the videos are completed. | material with wasting a lot of | Time | In addition, students will be will | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very informative and easy to learn. The course length is reasonable and suitable for leisure time solidifying grammar and punctuation. | is reasonable and suitable for leisure | Time | solidifying grammar and punctuation. | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Excellent refresher or reminder course! Activities are genuine and realistic with a bit of challenge, unlike some other courses on other websites that provide the answers. Instructor is pleasant, though a bit assuming, at times. Take this course whether you've grown up speaking english or not. | pleasant, though a bit assuming, at | Time | Take this course whether you've grown | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This course's content and delivery are excellent. This gave proper understanding of grammar and punctuation usage. Many a times, I used to believe, I properly use punctuation, but this course set the scores right. Thanks a lot for such an extraordinary course. | grammar and punctuation usage. Many a | Time | I used to believe, I properly | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I enjoyed this course very much. Going into this course, my goal was to review English grammar and improve my writing. After finishing it, I feel like I accomplished that goal. I enjoyed concise and clear style of the videos and clarity of examples given in them. Assignments and exercises, although challenging at times, were of comfortable length and fun to do. Personally, this course helped me to become aware of the sentences I write, and gave me the tools to revise and edit my writings more efficiently on my own. | Assignments and exercises, although challenging at | Time | were of comfortable length and fun | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very good course. It helped me revise and learn some correct grammar usage in short time. | some correct grammar usage in short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I feel this course has been specially designed for people like me who need to revive their knowledge of Grammar within little available time. Presentation of the course is concise and well-structured. Short quiz are taken at right time to reinforce the concepts. Discussions with peers are engaging. | knowledge of Grammar within little available | Time | Presentation of the course is concise | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I feel this course has been specially designed for people like me who need to revive their knowledge of Grammar within little available time. Presentation of the course is concise and well-structured. Short quiz are taken at right time to reinforce the concepts. Discussions with peers are engaging. | Short quiz are taken at right | Time | to reinforce the concepts. Discussions with | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I had a good time learning new things which are generally not told in your academics. Thanks to UCI for offering it. Best wishes. | I had a good | Time | learning new things which are generally | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very easy to follow. Videos are short but at the same time they deliver the perfect amount of information you need in order to proceed with no further problems. I loved how we review other students projects, the helps everyone to learn and succeed in class. | are short but at the same | Time | they deliver the perfect amount of | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | At my level, I found pretty interesting and effectively this course. I could put in practice in a real time, in a great balance, what I have learned. | put in practice in a real | Time | in a great balance, what I | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Well designed and neatly structured. Lots of useful information in short time. Mixture of videos, exercises and quizzes was fun, and peers interaction was invigorating. | Lots of useful information in short | Time | Mixture of videos, exercises and quizzes | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I wish it was more in-depth at times with some grammar that is slightly relevant with the course. | wish it was more in-depth at | Time | with some grammar that is slightly | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I was never strong with English, but now I am finding that the importance of this subject is forcing me to take the time to become stronger at it. This particular course is well put together, and is helping me advance and practice my English technical skills. | is forcing me to take the | Time | to become stronger at it. This | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| ct7G8DVLEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | This course is an outstanding survey from logic gates through assembler. At the end you will have the gate level design of an elementary CPU and RAM, and the mysteries of machine code will be revealed. I am an older learner returning to computer science after a twenty-year absence. I had previously been exposed to this material, so I was refreshing my knowledge. It took me about 5-6 hours per week. If someone is brand new to these concepts, the syllabus may move a bit fast for them, and they should expect to spend some additional time to absorb the material. It is an outstanding survey course that together with part II will help you understand how all the hardware and software layers of a computer system fit together. I recommend this course without reservation. | should expect to spend some additional | Time | to absorb the material. It is | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| ct7G8DVLEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | I was skeptical of HDL at first, and wished that the course had used a more industry-friendly language. I'm glad the instructors addressed this in the course. The HDL language used in the course is simple enough that hardly any time is "wasted" learning it. | is simple enough that hardly any | Time | is " wasted" learning it. | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| ct7G8DVLEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Simply takes your breath away to learn how computers are built from the ground up. This is like an art appreciation course ... but for a crucial technology that permeates every moment of our modern lives. Starting with the simplest pieces and moving all the way up to a functioning computer you will build nearly all the pieces with your own hands. You will learn how hardware is designed in the real world by actually making your own gates as well as an ALU - an absolutely delightful experience. You will then get your hands dirty with some assembly language - seeing how symbols are translated into bits before moving on to put together your functioning computer. The course is great because there is very little yak-shaving for you to do ... most of the boring stuff is actually handled by the software provided in the course. You get to focus on the joyous acts of discovering things for yourself and putting together the pieces of the puzzle at every stage. Many thanks to the professors and their team for taking the time to put this course together and for making something that's very abstract for most of us into something that's concrete and accessible. Thank you! | and their team for taking the | Time | to put this course together and | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| ct7G8DVLEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | This is one of the best CS courses I've taken so far. It's great to see how easy it is to build a simple yet powerful computer on your own, and it has given me for the first time the feeling of really understanding what's going on at the low level. The complete course is centered about the project of building a computer, so there are no quizzes and only few theoretical background lectures here. If you want a hands-on introduction to computer engineering, this is the way to go. | has given me for the first | Time | the feeling of really understanding what's | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| ct9K_oG4EeWyzwo1CAL63Q | Excellent assignment, the most demanding I have seen so far on Coursera. Hope to be able to take it successfully the second time. | to take it successfully the second | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ct9K_oG4EeWyzwo1CAL63Q | Peer review at times leaves a lot to be desired, esp geography specific biases. I would request that my final capstone submission be reviewed by course staff. I got very low scores whereas I think I did a good job on it covering all required domains extensively. | Peer review at | Time | leaves a lot to be desired, | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | awesome experiance ,good explanations but it would be better if you provide more time to do exercises | be better if you provide more | Time | to do exercises | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I really enjoyed the first two weeks. When it came to JavaScript I couldn't follow, so much information was missing and lessons were not clear anymore. I understand that the goal was to teach the most in a short time but this was not the right approach. | teach the most in a short | Time | but this was not the right | Negative | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was great to finally get to know about things I've been wondering for a long time. I got lost from time to time and struggled to keep up but, at the end I think I get the benefits the course was meant to provide. | I've been wondering for a long | Time | I got lost from time to | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was great to finally get to know about things I've been wondering for a long time. I got lost from time to time and struggled to keep up but, at the end I think I get the benefits the course was meant to provide. | long time. I got lost from | Time | to time and struggled to keep | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was great to finally get to know about things I've been wondering for a long time. I got lost from time to time and struggled to keep up but, at the end I think I get the benefits the course was meant to provide. | I got lost from time to | Time | and struggled to keep up but, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A very good course that teaches many interesting and surprising things. I admit I was unaware of this material. Completely unaware. Creating beautiful webpages (HTML, CSS), creating and modifying images with JavaScript, encrypting and decrypting images in other images !!! Ooooh !!! What an unexpected joy !!! I did not know someone can do such things all by himself. I'm really happy to have gone through this course. One thing. It takes time. I think that the time required that is given in the information about the course is unreal. Anyway I wholeheartedly suggest this course to anyone interested in science, computers, and is energetic enough to absorb this amazing stuff. | this course. One thing. It takes | Time | I think that the time required | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A very good course that teaches many interesting and surprising things. I admit I was unaware of this material. Completely unaware. Creating beautiful webpages (HTML, CSS), creating and modifying images with JavaScript, encrypting and decrypting images in other images !!! Ooooh !!! What an unexpected joy !!! I did not know someone can do such things all by himself. I'm really happy to have gone through this course. One thing. It takes time. I think that the time required that is given in the information about the course is unreal. Anyway I wholeheartedly suggest this course to anyone interested in science, computers, and is energetic enough to absorb this amazing stuff. | takes time. I think that the | Time | required that is given in the | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | My previous review is : This course teaches NOTHING about JAVA! Does not worth the money and time! After I learned more about coding I realized I was wrong that it is very important to understand HTML, CSS and JS before learning Java. The only thing is that I wish this course teaches more algorithm. | Does not worth the money and | Time | After I learned more about coding | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The jump to javascript is too great for beginners. Fundamental concepts of programming severely need more time spent on but are in fact glossed over too quickly. | concepts of programming severely need more | Time | spent on but are in fact | Negative | 0.77 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I learned eight lines of Java code in four weeks, and we never implemented any of it into a web application (viz, a script that actually runs in a live website). Read a book instead. It's cheaper, takes about the same amount of time, and you learn a lot more. I gave it a star because one was the minimum. It should be zero because it wasted my time. | takes about the same amount of | Time | and you learn a lot more. | Negative | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I learned eight lines of Java code in four weeks, and we never implemented any of it into a web application (viz, a script that actually runs in a live website). Read a book instead. It's cheaper, takes about the same amount of time, and you learn a lot more. I gave it a star because one was the minimum. It should be zero because it wasted my time. | be zero because it wasted my | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | the last week material is too time consuming it's actually requires 2 weeks of hard work | the last week material is too | Time | consuming it's actually requires 2 weeks | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | pretty good but very time consuming | pretty good but very | Time | consuming | Negative | 0.62 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good course. A little demanding for someone who cannot invest substantial time figuring out how to code some problems. | for someone who cannot invest substantial | Time | figuring out how to code some | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great run in with Javascript, HTML and concepts I remember from school days. If you have never programmed at all you might have a steeper curve as the work progresses. Also if you innovate on the tasks, prepare to spend more time than what is shown. I enjoyed this course. | the tasks, prepare to spend more | Time | than what is shown. I enjoyed | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Overall the course was great, with a nice variety of topics and plenty of time to complete it. Difficulty wise, the course was not difficult, however, some sections were a little bit confusing. Specifically regarding the JavaScript portion, some of the instructor videos that I viewed didn't really help and instead caused extensive use of outside for help. Sometimes the instructors would seem a little bit unprepared for the presentation as well, resulting in videos a little bit less polished than it could've been. | variety of topics and plenty of | Time | to complete it. Difficulty wise, the | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Granted it's an online course so there's not the back and forth provided at a physical classroom. However, the presentation of content is efficient and if an individual puts in enough time and effort, they'll get what they're looking from with this course. | if an individual puts in enough | Time | and effort, they'll get what they're | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It is very helpful and engaging. If you are starting computing for the first time, this is a very good place to start. It makes the impossible, possible. In the end, you'll feel good about learning computing. I guruntee you. | are starting computing for the first | Time | this is a very good place | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | thank u so mach for this course it was simple and pretty good for the first 2 weeks i really enjoyed it :) ; but the other two weeks though ... i had a hard time there , if you try to improve it , the js wasn't understandable at all or at least mention in the course info that js background needed !! | . . i had a hard | Time | there , if you try to | Negative | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The lecturers are speaking very fast. Some times at the code practice it is not understandable how to solve the problem. | lecturers are speaking very fast. Some | Time | at the code practice it is | Positive | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course. The explanations made recover my love for programmin, sadly I didn´t have time to finish it, but next time I will. | for programmin, sadly I didn´t have | Time | to finish it, but next time | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course. The explanations made recover my love for programmin, sadly I didn´t have time to finish it, but next time I will. | time to finish it, but next | Time | I will. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Video Lectures are really great and easy to understand with hands on programming tasks. Very interesting and informative. Learnt a lot within 4 weeks time. Definitely recommend for anyone interested in creating websites. | Learnt a lot within 4 weeks | Time | Definitely recommend for anyone interested in | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A giant and complete waste of time. $79, and 1 month of work and it's all Javascript, no java. Worse yet, you are required to work in BlueJ, (google it) with custom Javascript functions that you are not allowed to view or use outside the course. So, none of the code you write in this course will ever be able to be used anywhere else. (The functions probably are in a minified file, but the students were not given access to that file.) A complete waste of time. I would give it ZERO stars but can't submit this rating without giving it one star. | A giant and complete waste of | Time | $79, and 1 month of work | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A giant and complete waste of time. $79, and 1 month of work and it's all Javascript, no java. Worse yet, you are required to work in BlueJ, (google it) with custom Javascript functions that you are not allowed to view or use outside the course. So, none of the code you write in this course will ever be able to be used anywhere else. (The functions probably are in a minified file, but the students were not given access to that file.) A complete waste of time. I would give it ZERO stars but can't submit this rating without giving it one star. | file. ) A complete waste of | Time | I would give it ZERO stars | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Week 4 was a big leap from week 3. Difficult with less time to complete the project. But course was good . I think course could be extended by adding 2 more weeks so that more practice sessions could be given to students. | from week 3. Difficult with less | Time | to complete the project. But course | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This class is challenging for a beginner but really does teach a lot in a short time frame. I feel that some concepts in week 4 were much harder than necessary for a beginner, but am glad I didn't give up. Some students said they were dropping it in the forums after having passed previous weeks. I'm glad I stuck with it though because I believe that I was able to get far enough in my understanding to pass this course and also give me an idea of some things I may like to explore in the future. It's possible to pass this course even if one of the concepts has you frustrated. Keep with it! | teach a lot in a short | Time | frame. I feel that some concepts | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The professors are erudite and give amazing lecture. They explain the hard subject in an easy-to-understand way.Besides, they cover more knowledge in a limited time. | cover more knowledge in a limited | Time | | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | This is a course for those who have not spent any time delving into comparative religion and testing their own traditional (family taught) belief systems with thoughts of act versus "trut." | those who have not spent any | Time | delving into comparative religion and testing | Positive | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | A new course with new material. The course is in the beginning stages of evolution, just like the human psyche. Perhaps someone will refine it in time but it is a very good course, especially considering nothing quite like this has been presented before. | Perhaps someone will refine it in | Time | but it is a very good | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | Summary: Unit 1 is comprehensive in covering historical foundations of after-life beliefs, from pre-history to modern times. This is a necessary grounding to understand the evolution of religion. It provides different religious perspectives on the issue, and Prof Hamilton brings about an objective view in exploring the topic. Perhaps the important thing for students to better appreciate the course is that it is titled Soul "Beliefs". These are beliefs from different religions, not facts. It is necessary to keep that in mind. Understanding that will lead to a more unbiased and scientific approach towards the topic. Context: I came across this course after recently losing my fiancée. Am going through Unit 2 at the moment. I grew up in a Buddhist environment for over 20 years before distancing myself over the last several years. I appreciate the philosophies of Buddhism and that of other religions, but I would describe myself to be agnostic. My recent experiences and subsequent studies of history, philosophy, neuroscience and psychiatry and various interactions with different religious leaders have only reinforced this perspective. This course has been very helpful in providing unbiased information on the topic of after-life beliefs. | after-life beliefs, from pre-history to modern | Time | This is a necessary grounding to | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | I enrolled in this course hoping to find a balanced perspective about historical foundations for religions and other philosophies. It did include a good amount of interesting material around different systems, but there were a couple of key things that made me lose interest in the course at around week 6 out of 11. First, I felt that the instructor talks about how he wants people to learn to think for themselves, yet I also felt that he himself preaches. Much of the evidence in his lectures is delivered as an anecdote, which might appeal to some (e.g. I could see that happening to me) and probably made the course more entertaining, but didn't do it for me. I felt that the Wade reading, in contrast, was balanced, cited other sources, and pulled in a variety of perspectives, but when I listened to the lectures, I felt that Professor Ogilvie had a tendency to state points and expect people to believe them. Second, on a related note -- this course was not shaped for the online medium. I understand that it's cheaper and easier for universities to just use recordings of live lectures, but that meant that the lectures contained quite a bit of anecdotal rambling (e.g. going off on a tangent on how you should never take charge of somebody else's soul). Another, smaller beef I have with the presentation of the course is that when he had students who were raised under different religions come up and speak their beliefs, it took a long time to demonstrate a fairly simple idea -- despite people ascribing to the same "label," the same religion, they can have in fact been taught very different things. In a live university class, having students speak can work because the evidence is being presented by "one of you" ("you" being the students), and has the added benefit of building community in the class. But in an online class, I didn't feel that kinship at all. I'll make a disclaimer that much of this review is about how I personally felt about the course, and about how it wasn't right for me. Some of what I didn't like, others may like. But overall, despite being initially interested in the topic and why people believe what they do, I didn't feel that the material was delivered in a way that captured my continued interest. | their beliefs, it took a long | Time | to demonstrate a fairly simple idea | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | I must confess I've tried to complete other courses before but due to time constraints and other responsibilities I've failed miserably. But this time thanks to the fact I can study this on my own pace, I'm no longer having a clash between my job and the courses I want to study, which in turn fills me with excitement and appreciation for this course. Personally, I have a deep interest in the field of religion (spirituality, theology, comparative religions, etc) which I think it is fascinating. That's why I decided to enroll in this course and give it my best. I'm learning so much thanks to the awesome lectures the professors are given and the material it is provided. I watch the lectures, I take tons of notes and I do some extra research as well. I'm just about to finish unit 1 and looking forward to starting unit 2. I want to thank Coursera from the bottom of my heart for making this course available for free so I can have access to this material. The knowledge I'm getting here is helping me to sharpen my focus on what to study next. I hope more courses on religion (from an academic perspective) are offered in the future so I can learn even more. (I saw a course on Calvinism I'm already interested in but it's not available yet). My name is George (Jorge in Spanish) and I'm from South America, Chile. Thank you to all of you for your efforts. They are deeply appreciated. | other courses before but due to | Time | constraints and other responsibilities I've failed | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| d086Bc9YEeSS_CIACzcAUg | I must confess I've tried to complete other courses before but due to time constraints and other responsibilities I've failed miserably. But this time thanks to the fact I can study this on my own pace, I'm no longer having a clash between my job and the courses I want to study, which in turn fills me with excitement and appreciation for this course. Personally, I have a deep interest in the field of religion (spirituality, theology, comparative religions, etc) which I think it is fascinating. That's why I decided to enroll in this course and give it my best. I'm learning so much thanks to the awesome lectures the professors are given and the material it is provided. I watch the lectures, I take tons of notes and I do some extra research as well. I'm just about to finish unit 1 and looking forward to starting unit 2. I want to thank Coursera from the bottom of my heart for making this course available for free so I can have access to this material. The knowledge I'm getting here is helping me to sharpen my focus on what to study next. I hope more courses on religion (from an academic perspective) are offered in the future so I can learn even more. (I saw a course on Calvinism I'm already interested in but it's not available yet). My name is George (Jorge in Spanish) and I'm from South America, Chile. Thank you to all of you for your efforts. They are deeply appreciated. | responsibilities I've failed miserably. But this | Time | thanks to the fact I can | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | This course is an overview of String Quartet music. It provides some nice resources to get to know certain composers or quartets better. It helped guide me to some nice music. The instructors are knowledgeable and do a good job imparting some of their insight into the lectures. The level of detail is about right for my time and attention span. | detail is about right for my | Time | and attention span. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | This course proved to be a waste of time. There was nothing about the structure and forms of the strong quartet, just "here's a good one to listen to." Almost complete devoid of intellectual content. | proved to be a waste of | Time | There was nothing about the structure | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | Thank you for this wonderful course. It provided an overview of the history of the string quartet. It exposed me to music I was not familiar with and helped me appreciate the genre. Because of this course, I have already bought CDs of the complete string quartets of Tchaickovsky and Schubert and plan to keep expanding my collection. I now take time every evening to listen to one work before I go to bed. It has added a new d | expanding my collection. I now take | Time | every evening to listen to one | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | To dig deeper into music theory, it helps to explore specific genres one-by-one. So to create a sort of spider's web of knowledge in one's mind to which any future knowledge can adhere to. This is my 3rd music course from coursera, and 2nd from Curtis. I very much recommend these. To learn in one's own pace helps to concentrate to subjects at times when the mind is ready and the mood level is good. This makes learning an enjoyable experience. I was no fan of String Quartets before, but I truly am now. The chamber music with it's roots in class system of societies has always troubled me with it's wigs and powders and halls with exclusive acoustics. But after completing this course I can see, that this is all just a facade and the "chamber" might as well be my backyard in a sunny afternoon. There are tunes which are very pleasant to hear even when counterpoint is not yet "your thing". Thank you for this wonderful experience. | helps to concentrate to subjects at | Time | when the mind is ready and | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| d1WkxNf4EeSFEiIAC0CpYw | A great course with wonderful exposure to a range of pieces. And so many demos. I wish there had been time for more. | demos. I wish there had been | Time | for more. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| D5GKj_UHEeSBSSIAC7JSBQ | A very interesting course and a much needed one in the times that we leave...I found it very difficult not to be affected by my ethical views and emotions but I managed to complete the course and learn a lot of new things. Thank you for making it available! | a much needed one in the | Time | that we leave. . . I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| D5GKj_UHEeSBSSIAC7JSBQ | As a Pet Care manager at a boarding facility I encourage my staff to participate in a continuing education progam for rewards. I stongly encouraged them to sign up for this course. I am taking this a second time as it was extemely interesting the first time. Anyone interested in animals in general should check this out! | I am taking this a second | Time | as it was extemely interesting the | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| D5GKj_UHEeSBSSIAC7JSBQ | As a Pet Care manager at a boarding facility I encourage my staff to participate in a continuing education progam for rewards. I stongly encouraged them to sign up for this course. I am taking this a second time as it was extemely interesting the first time. Anyone interested in animals in general should check this out! | it was extemely interesting the first | Time | Anyone interested in animals in general | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| D5GKj_UHEeSBSSIAC7JSBQ | My major is not about agriculture, but I love this field very much. That is the reason why I spent my time with this course on Coursera. This on-demand course is very convenient for anyone who want to know more about animal agriculture. I strongly like and recommend this course. | the reason why I spent my | Time | with this course on Coursera. This | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| d5HHlUTlEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Nice review of a very difficult time in our history which was favored by some courageous folks who worked and endured a lot to effect a better society. | Nice review of a very difficult | Time | in our history which was favored | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | It's really fantastic! Learning in this course is like travelling by a time machine, and the professor leads you to know every teaching approach in detail. I like this course! | course is like travelling by a | Time | machine, and the professor leads you | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | All the theories are presented in an extremely organized way. The dramatic representation has been rather memorable. Seeing myriad theories from the lens of time has helped my knowledge stick. | myriad theories from the lens of | Time | has helped my knowledge stick. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Very enjoyable course. A big thank to all the teachers! Especially the humorous and charming Dr Dixon. I never thought American teachers could be so humorous as I have some bad experience with an American teacher when I was young. When I started my Form 1 secondary education at the age of 13, an American male teacher marched into our classroom and ordered us to have an English name each. He said that our Chinese names sounded silly to him and they were difficult to pronoun. I said to him as I came from a village and my mother was illiterate, could he recommend a name. He said that he didn't care, i could call myself Barbara, Mary, anything I like. I felt so insulted and that put me off from learning English for a long time. I guess he was using Direct approach at that time because he did not speak Chinese, and none of the students understood English then. We did not understand what he said throughout the whole year. I am proud of the name my father gave me and I still only use my Chinese name. | from learning English for a long | Time | I guess he was using Direct | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Very enjoyable course. A big thank to all the teachers! Especially the humorous and charming Dr Dixon. I never thought American teachers could be so humorous as I have some bad experience with an American teacher when I was young. When I started my Form 1 secondary education at the age of 13, an American male teacher marched into our classroom and ordered us to have an English name each. He said that our Chinese names sounded silly to him and they were difficult to pronoun. I said to him as I came from a village and my mother was illiterate, could he recommend a name. He said that he didn't care, i could call myself Barbara, Mary, anything I like. I felt so insulted and that put me off from learning English for a long time. I guess he was using Direct approach at that time because he did not speak Chinese, and none of the students understood English then. We did not understand what he said throughout the whole year. I am proud of the name my father gave me and I still only use my Chinese name. | was using Direct approach at that | Time | because he did not speak Chinese, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | These themes felt very surface-level and redundant. The material could likely have been covered more quickly and allowed for more time to be spent on more tangible, every day information that might help those that are not already teachers. | more quickly and allowed for more | Time | to be spent on more tangible, | Negative | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This is the frist time that I have enrolled MOOC course online, I have to say it's awesome, I learned a lot From ASU, this course is impressive and useful, Dr. Shane is the best tutor I've never seen who makes the class so interesting and I am eager to learn more. | This is the frist | Time | that I have enrolled MOOC course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | As non-education major, presenting the approaches using a historical timeline is helpful. This way, it was easier to see the weakness of each approach although it could get quite confusing at times because a few approaches have significant overlaps. | it could get quite confusing at | Time | because a few approaches have significant | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | very entertaining and informational at the same time! | entertaining and informational at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was really time taking as in it required a committed time to read through and analyze different approaches. I felt like a student after a long time. Thank you Dr. Shane for your different avatars and Ms. Jessica for a very clear summarization. Thanks to all the teachers involved. | This course was really | Time | taking as in it required a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was really time taking as in it required a committed time to read through and analyze different approaches. I felt like a student after a long time. Thank you Dr. Shane for your different avatars and Ms. Jessica for a very clear summarization. Thanks to all the teachers involved. | as in it required a committed | Time | to read through and analyze different | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was really time taking as in it required a committed time to read through and analyze different approaches. I felt like a student after a long time. Thank you Dr. Shane for your different avatars and Ms. Jessica for a very clear summarization. Thanks to all the teachers involved. | like a student after a long | Time | Thank you Dr. Shane for your | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A great course and fully packed with interesting information about different methodologies thought time. Wouldn't give it 5 stars because most part during the video lectures are just silly and although I know the professor is trying his best to convey an idea, it seems like there are moments it just drifts away from the point. Also, the "angel x devil" debates are equally silly, opposite to the following overview video which is excellent. I'd recommend everybody to take this course but I certainly wouldn't do it again and neither dowload the videos for future reference. | interesting information about different methodologies thought | Time | Wouldn't give it 5 stars because | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| d64E7li7EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | In my university, I had to spend the whole semester only to study the theories of second language acquisition; my old-fashioned professors made me write down what they say and memorize all of them. And after 5 years of graduation, I don't remember a thing. BUT this course brought my old memories back and get them classified in a very simple and clear way; plus it didn't take so much time! I really enjoyed the course. Thank you Dr Shane! | plus it didn't take so much | Time | I really enjoyed the course. Thank | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This was a great course, but it was very difficult. I am currently taking a 300 level Data Structures and Algorithm class in Java and relied on some things I learned from that course to help me finish this one. Still, I hit a few road-blocks on programs that held me back for a few weeks until I could find an answer. There were times where I wasn't sure about the specifications. I also needed to use Eclipse on the final program to help find some errors. I spent between 10-20 hours per week on this course. It would have been very helpful to go through the course with someone or a group or have a person that I could email a copy of my code to for suggestions. Overall, I am really glad I took the course. I learned a lot! | could find an answer. There were | Time | where I wasn't sure about the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| dB1qehnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The homework is too time consuming. | The homework is too | Time | consuming. | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | In a short time I learned a whole lot about Interaction Design. I already feel confident enough to start working as a UI/UX designer. Thank you Prof. Scott Klemmer for his amazing insights. | In a short | Time | I learned a whole lot about | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | The lectures were great. While some people complained that "the instructor is reading off something else" that never seemed to be a problem. Mr. Klemmer did a good job of making the lectures friendly and understandable. The best part of the course was the assignments. I loved how I actually had to go to people and interview them, draw storyboards of ideas I have and heuristically evaluate sites. The assignments made sure I was actually engaged in doing them. One thing I would suggest is to try different motifs for different sessions. It seems that students always work with a "transportation problem" in this course. That can be mixed up from time to time I think to give the students a more diversified experience of Human Centered Design. | That can be mixed up from | Time | to time I think to give | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | The lectures were great. While some people complained that "the instructor is reading off something else" that never seemed to be a problem. Mr. Klemmer did a good job of making the lectures friendly and understandable. The best part of the course was the assignments. I loved how I actually had to go to people and interview them, draw storyboards of ideas I have and heuristically evaluate sites. The assignments made sure I was actually engaged in doing them. One thing I would suggest is to try different motifs for different sessions. It seems that students always work with a "transportation problem" in this course. That can be mixed up from time to time I think to give the students a more diversified experience of Human Centered Design. | be mixed up from time to | Time | I think to give the students | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Very well designed. Estimated time required to complete the assignments were inappropriate, it took me longer. | Very well designed. Estimated | Time | required to complete the assignments were | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| 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.) | prototyping one. Better understanding of the | Time | that would take me to conceptualize | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| 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.) | (the 2 hours observed on the | Time | estimate were not realistic on my | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | This entire series has been fantastic! I'm making a career change right now - going into UX Design - and I really believe that I would not have been able to do so without this course. Given a week to redesign an app to get into a vocational school's career training program, I was only able to do so thanks largely in part to the materials found in these lectures. Suggestion: Could it be made possible to unlock videos ahead of the weekly schedule for people like me who are (mostly) auditing the course? It would be really helpful if one is under time pressure and needs access to material, like how to do 'need finding,' to be able to jump ahead to that lecture. Thank you all for making this great course! Truly, this age is nothing short of a new renaissance. | really helpful if one is under | Time | pressure and needs access to material, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Amazing first hand course by Mr. Klemmer. He is very informative and clear onto his lectures. The assignments feel relevant and are just in the right doses. I have learned HCD in Industrial Design School before but Mr. Klemmer hits it out better out of the park. For the first time, I've actually understood and wrapped my head around the topic of HCD. | of the park. For the first | Time | I've actually understood and wrapped my | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | Good class, except for quizzes were complicated at times. User input instructions was not clear. | except for quizzes were complicated at | Time | User input instructions was not clear. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | A very challenging and worthwhile course! The homework assignments took hours but taught me a lot. Highly recommended if you have the time and effort to commit to this course. | Highly recommended if you have the | Time | and effort to commit to this | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | This was challenging, and gave a nice basis for the courses that followed. Spent easily twice as much time as the estimated given for the class. About 6-9 hours a week. | followed. Spent easily twice as much | Time | as the estimated given for the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| 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. | years and this is the first | Time | I have wanted a refund. | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | I've been a programmer for years, but I never had any training into the whole world of design. This course has really opened my eyes into the science involved in figuring out new products. This course is amazing! Very in-depth, easy to follow, but challenging at the same time. I highly recommend this course. | follow, but challenging at the same | Time | I highly recommend this course. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| DDBg7AlXEeWTSSIAC0MDtg | I had a fantastic time undergoing this course. Having been in the field for over a decade, I have the experience of doing all this, but to learn it all over again and to reinforce the design basics was a fun exercise I would highly recommend. | I had a fantastic | Time | undergoing this course. Having been in | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| dh3wTQZNEeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I don't see how the assignments would make me a more creative person. Some of the content was new and interesting but overall I din't think it was a good use of my time. | was a good use of my | Time | | Negative | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| dh3wTQZNEeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Creativity without a reason, without a real problem/question. Divergent thinking per se. Try to be divergent just to be divergent. Too simplistic, doesn't worth your time. | divergent. Too simplistic, doesn't worth your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| dh3wTQZNEeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The assignments do not give you any practical methods for actual problem solving. They're just a succession of activities that pretend to be creative by making you do things "you wouldn't normally do". It's like they forgot the part about "problem solving". The assignments are to eat foods you've never eaten, talk to people you wouldn't normally talk to, take a photo of yourself smooching someone/something, and to "give" something to someone you "never have given anything before". That is not creative nor helpful at problem solving. It's just a series of activities for people who have too much time on their hand and need something to do to get out of their routine. Not a course I would recommend for anyone wanting to gain useful skills. | for people who have too much | Time | on their hand and need something | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| DHPhM5ijEeWjfxIrc5BW9Q | The course is very informative. I had a great time learning. | very informative. I had a great | Time | learning. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| DJfupMVPEeWLqBIulHpzDw | This course is great. It's obviously tougher than the Part 1, though not exactly a follow up on the first part, as it covers different areas. The course content is such that it did not become very statistics-oriented - and it had independent lectures by Nobel Prize winning economists too. It's very easy to use the jargon that the course is suited for the layman, which it probably is not, but it's designed for ready understanding by a novice in economics, and Prof Yoram and his team have done a great job in putting this together. Thoroughly enjoyed it, even though at times I did have misgivings that I may not be able to complete it. | Thoroughly enjoyed it, even though at | Time | I did have misgivings that I | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | The course changed my perception on education and now I do ask questions on why, how and what in relation to teaching. Many a times we remain silent and this is seen as acceptance of the system as it exists. | in relation to teaching. Many a | Time | we remain silent and this is | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | Certainly for self-teachers, disciplined people who want to go the extra step. Really nice contextualizing, not too difficult in terms of time or content but certainly stimulating. Forms a nice basis for continuous improvement and self -reflection for those of use who were not trained to do so in a more formal setting. | not too difficult in terms of | Time | or content but certainly stimulating. Forms | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | It was really good on content part. I really like the course material. It is going to help me in my current organization project development work. At the same time i want to explore other available courses on cyber security. | project development work. At the same | Time | i want to explore other available | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | This course have very little to do with actual security. Most of the time you will hear about how to design applications, and what is a good design policy. | with actual security. Most of the | Time | you will hear about how to | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Very excellent course module for usable security, real time examples makes students understand easily. | course module for usable security, real | Time | examples makes students understand easily. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | efficient systems while at the same | Time | ensuring the security of them has | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | This was an extremely elementary and thus disappointing course. While the importance of "Usability" was rightly emphasized, the representation in terms of examples, case studies, etc. was simplistic. I appreciated having my attention drawn to the pitfalls of HCI design and the consequent failure of the corresponding systems. However, the solutions were presented as if: 1.) there are always "correct" interface/usability choices; 2.) the "correct" choice is all that's needed for the system to be optimally functional; and 3.) there is never a tension between usability and effective functioning of a system (that can't be resolved with correcting the usability). It is irresponsible to suggest, for example, that a user selected memorable password is generally adequately secure without also covering ways that an interface can guide/nudge the user to create a secure password. Wide recognition of the importance of this may be more recent than the studies covered in the course. There is nothing wrong with studying old, seminal research, even in this age of "Internet time," but I wish I wasn't left wondering what, if any, developments had occurred in the decade or so since that research took place. As for tension between usability and security, it absolutely exists. For instance, PGP encryption is a reliable way to secure information, yet making it usable remains a challenge. This is not even mentioned in the entire course. In fact, this course would leave an otherwise uninformed student believing that there are usability solutions waiting to be applied to every cause of info insecurity if the techies would just look. I wish the course had at least acknowledged that there are cases where a slight compromise on usability might be necessary for the sake of appropriate security. Lastly, for those designing an HCI for security, it is important to understand threat models. This concept is also missing from the course. === I reviewed this course (above) immediately after I finished it. I am now in the 3rd week of Software Security, the 2nd course in the Cybersecurity specialization, and am realizing that 2 stars was a generous assessment. Based on the prerequisites of the Software Security course, the Usable Security course, in its current form, is too elementary to be appropriate for people who have the experience/knowledge required for the rest of the courses in this specialization. As I explained above, the course relies heavily on decade-old research but does not cover any developments since. For instance, the usability issues covered in the studies are for ancient versions of browsers with no discussion of how the browsers and our infosec vulnerabilities have changed since those studies were published. Another example is the instructor's eschewing of password managers while many knowledgeable folks in the infosec community today recommend their use. The usability challenges of password managers and a discussion of how they might be mitigated would have been more appropriate. | in this age of " Internet | Time | " but I wish I wasn't | Negative | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | This is a course for students with little or no work experience. I've been in the industry for twenty years and found some good information, but the quizes aren't designed for experienced adult learners. Not being able to discuss with the professor why an answer is incorrect or even knowing exactly what about an answer makes it incorrect further distances the students from learning. Given that one essentially spends an extra work day each week on the course, I expected more value for my precious time. This week I decided the value isn't there. I might recommend the course for undergrad students but not for working adults. | expected more value for my precious | Time | This week I decided the value | Negative | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | This Course was a great introduction. It laid the ground work for the specialization in an easy to follow manner. It was also packed with lots of great information in a short time. | of great information in a short | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | prefect presentation of materials and really interesting way of teaching. for the first time of my life i am actually understanding software engineering principles. | way of teaching. for the first | Time | of my life i am actually | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Excelent!! good job thanks for you time and knowledge. | ! good job thanks for you | Time | and knowledge. | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | It is very intense and full of useful information that you can not find anywhere else except if you are practicing this specialization for a long time | practicing this specialization for a long | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| DzdXURoCEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | It is really hard to make all the stuff required to complete in time, but it absolutely worth every minute spent. | the stuff required to complete in | Time | but it absolutely worth every minute | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| DzeIAhnpEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The capstone project is interesting but requires far too much time compared to the other courses and to what is announced. | interesting but requires far too much | Time | compared to the other courses and | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | Really enjoyed this course, very informative and good for someone joining the hospitality world for the first time. | the hospitality world for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | let alone analyze colleagues. The first | Time | did not get the minimum score. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | get the minimum score. The second | Time | with the longest time, I could | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | The second time, with the longest | Time | I could better perform the exercise. | Negative | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | me in the first and second | Time | had little or no idea about | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | this Mooc, so it would have | Time | for a further deepening of the | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | In my humble opinion it is necessary to review some points in this module: 1) Video Content: Making more dynamic, switch between explanations and slides in full screen. Only explanations, it is very tiring to attend the classes. The video would be ideal as shown in week 4 of this Mooc: How the hotel shouldnt work with Expedia? or video: How to hotel shouldnt work with Booking.com? 2) Analysis requested: In the first week the requested analysis was of a very high level, it required knowledge of financial analysis and hotel area. In my case, I felt much difficulty because I do not have any knowledge in the hotel industry. And analyzing the exercise, I realized it was necessary to have knowledge of financial ratios of profitability and a certain familiarity in the hotel industry. I left a comment on the discussion board stating that I was not feeling safe to do the exercise. However, there was no demonstration by the teachers of the course. In short, I was not feeling prepared, let alone analyze colleagues. The first time, did not get the minimum score. The second time, with the longest time, I could better perform the exercise. But rather it was the result of review of financial ratios and other other accessories. I realized that those who examined me in the first and second time, had little or no idea about financial analysis. And another point that struck me was that one of the people who fell for me to analyze, was all in white and the person apologized for failing to do. With nothing to analyze, I did not think fair to give a low rating, so I preferred not to analyze. If the person left blank, something needs to be revised. When mounting a course, you have to take into consideration that there are different levels of students: beginner, intermediate and advanced in the subject matter. The first week was not to have been given is analysis. It could have been the third or fourth week of this Mooc, so it would have time for a further deepening of the matter addressed. 3) Amount of content: Adding the video, quiz and analysis, are about 30 content. It is very tiring and little time for such content. Could decrease the amount of video and quiz, relocating to another week course or Mooc. 4) Feedback: Teachers need to leave a contact way (facebook, twitter, etc.) and be active in Coursera forum or leave a wizard to ask questions when needed. 5) Notes: He missed the weight of the notes. I found a little confusing the allocation of notes. 6) Curriculum: Missed curriculum (biography) of teachers. No contact information. 7) Books: Missed suggestions of books in the hotel industry. Anyway, these are only observed points in order to contribute to development of course. Thanks for listening. | It is very tiring and little | Time | for such content. Could decrease the | Positive | 0.79 | 3.0 |
| DzPiWTeDEeWCYBKNeFwojw | this course was not unto the standard i even completed all the assignment i did not pass one and still i got time to redo the assignment and submitted and never got the grade back for it.. | pass one and still i got | Time | to redo the assignment and submitted | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| d_71NKdPEeSOWCIAC2iDyw | Well worth your time in hearing first hand from combat veterans. " War What is it Good For?" an excellent book that is thought provoking, it covers a lot of the material that is discussed throughout the course. | Well worth your | Time | in hearing first hand from combat | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | I like that the course covered negotiation in general in relatively short time. However I found the lectures were too dry and theoretical as they lacked real life examples. | negotiation in general in relatively short | Time | However I found the lectures were | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | I had a hard time paying attention to the woman speaking and dropped the course after completing week one. | I had a hard | Time | paying attention to the woman speaking | Negative | 0.71 | 2.0 |
| e4SzF9c1EeS-LCIAC3icWw | This course offered nothing significant or new to anyone who has spent any time around business or government negotiations. It really seems as though the instructor either assumes all of her students are completely inept or that because it is a free course that producing a reasonably viable product is not necessary. | to anyone who has spent any | Time | around business or government negotiations. It | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| e9PicBJhEeaoZBKRisF_Dw | This is probably one of the best courses I have ever taken. Although time was a limiting factor, a broad range of essential topics was covered thoroughly (given the time), and I really feel that I learnt a lot about hardware, software, sound engineering, and production skills. I also learnt a lot of terminology, which I was finding very confusing during my efforts to teach myself, and feel like I had a good foundation upon which to continue my learning and improve my skills. | courses I have ever taken. Although | Time | was a limiting factor, a broad | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| e9PicBJhEeaoZBKRisF_Dw | This is probably one of the best courses I have ever taken. Although time was a limiting factor, a broad range of essential topics was covered thoroughly (given the time), and I really feel that I learnt a lot about hardware, software, sound engineering, and production skills. I also learnt a lot of terminology, which I was finding very confusing during my efforts to teach myself, and feel like I had a good foundation upon which to continue my learning and improve my skills. | topics was covered thoroughly (given the | Time | and I really feel that I | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course! I had a wonderful time during the course | Great course! I had a wonderful | Time | during the course | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | WOW!!! Raised the bar compared to the previous courses, final project took some effort...fast paced but worth the time | . fast paced but worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really liked the course. Tha manner of teaching and the subject with all the details of "how to" are attention catchy. Unfortunately just had no time to complete it properly and in time. | attention catchy. Unfortunately just had no | Time | to complete it properly and in | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really liked the course. Tha manner of teaching and the subject with all the details of "how to" are attention catchy. Unfortunately just had no time to complete it properly and in time. | to complete it properly and in | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| EA0hyTUGEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Best course in the specialization so far. Well thought out and explained. The course still has the same problem with quiz questions being at times obtuse, but overall it's a really good course. | problem with quiz questions being at | Time | obtuse, but overall it's a really | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| EdKScTVwEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I don't know how useful the ambiguous requirements exercise is when we only have one-way feedback. I also think that the ambiguous requirements exercise is the most important of the course, and the exercise missed the mark. I would suggest you structure that exercise as a dialogue, where a PM is working with the customer to elicit requirements, and not give us a big long wish-list of functionality. Structured as a dialogue, you can show that a PM would ask, "You said that the game would make noise. When is the first time it makes noise? How often would game noises be made? Does it ever stop? What makes it stop? Why even have the game make noise in the first place? Are there different noises made during the course of game play/" So, I can't recommend this particular course, and I'm concerned about what the capstone will look like if you give us an assignment where we're to make sense of functionality delivered as a block of text . | make noise. When is the first | Time | it makes noise? How often would | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| Eeb34jesEeWXuQopUhAqaw | Highly recommended for anyone who wants to learn programming. I started from basically zero and learned a lot throughout the Specialization. The instructors do a great job of giving you enough information throughout the lectures without over loading you and making the assignments challenging enough that you feel like you are really getting the most out of your time. | getting the most out of your | Time | | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| EfvjN5XvEeSqQiIACyEY7w | I didn't like the professor's teaching style. He took way more time than was necessary to get his points across. Plus the little quips where he's pretending to engage with the viewer made it feel like a kids show. There were some good nuggets of info, but there was too much filler to get to it. | teaching style. He took way more | Time | than was necessary to get his | Positive | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| EfvjN5XvEeSqQiIACyEY7w | I have been taking business courses for over 20 years, and have not run into a course so full of good ideas in such a short space of time, let alone for free. congratulations and than | in such a short space of | Time | let alone for free. congratulations and | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| EGWVwnE7EeWxvQr3acyajw | Some of the lectures were too general, too fast, or left things out I also don't like the peer review type grading structure Also, I am sure I'm not the only person taking this course (or the whole series), who does not CURRENTLY, have a career in healthcare; I am working towards that - So; to ask us to do a market sizing memo and come up with something from nothing, while swearing not to plagiarize, is not a good method. I'm here to gain knowledge and skills - a broad overview. Perhaps a course or actual 2nd degree in Health Info Tech or Healthcare Admin. is better way to go for me; however, I cannot afford it finance or time - therefore, am trying to learn as much as possible off here. Kudsos to Parente for having super cool interests though - the sailing, the places he sails and the awesome vacation home in the Scottish Highlands! | I cannot afford it finance or | Time | - therefore, am trying to learn | Negative | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| 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. | learning nuggets into half the course | Time | instead of hearing you ready through | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| EH0q6oysEeWIbw4397jVQw | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. The lecturer (Dave Underwood) has a relaxed and engaging style. He made it interesting and I felt I've learnt quite a bit in a short space of time. Recommend doing the optional exercises to practice what you learn as you go. | bit in a short space of | Time | Recommend doing the optional exercises to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | Great course and great teacher. The lectures are quick, easy to understand but nevertheless interesting. The time schedule is tough, but you can easily switch to the next session to have more time. The only aspect that I would change is the technical level of (some of) the lectures: sometimes they are even too easy, and a lot of time is used to explain very basic stuff. Maybe some 'optional' lectures might be added on | to understand but nevertheless interesting. The | Time | schedule is tough, but you can | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | Great course and great teacher. The lectures are quick, easy to understand but nevertheless interesting. The time schedule is tough, but you can easily switch to the next session to have more time. The only aspect that I would change is the technical level of (some of) the lectures: sometimes they are even too easy, and a lot of time is used to explain very basic stuff. Maybe some 'optional' lectures might be added on | the next session to have more | Time | The only aspect that I would | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | Great course and great teacher. The lectures are quick, easy to understand but nevertheless interesting. The time schedule is tough, but you can easily switch to the next session to have more time. The only aspect that I would change is the technical level of (some of) the lectures: sometimes they are even too easy, and a lot of time is used to explain very basic stuff. Maybe some 'optional' lectures might be added on | too easy, and a lot of | Time | is used to explain very basic | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| eH8S1b38EeWxzxJER_JW2w | I did learn a lot in this course, especially for me that I am very new on this topic. It has been challenging enough for me. Some recommendations for improvements. 1) Adjust the estimated time to complete the assignments. It took me a lot more than the estimates to complete them. 2) The grading system especially on the final assignment is too difficult. You need to be EXCELLENT to pass and this is difficult to achieve in a subjective peer review rating. 3) I did not expect to be responsible of providing grades for classmates. It is not clear if the university offering the course will provide feedback. Feedback from the experts is what I expected when I bought the certificate. 4) I had to do my final assignment on a different software as my free trial subscription for Adobe Illustrator expired. Overall, it was a productive course for me and I did learn from it. | for improvements. 1) Adjust the estimated | Time | to complete the assignments. It took | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 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. | not recommend this course. Waste of | Time | if not even waste of money. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| eL9HZ2ItEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | This was fantastic course! I've never experienced such passion in an online course. I've learned so much, and I am striving for more... fortunately this is just the beginning. No wonder it has been proclaimed as one of the 50 most popular MOOCs of all time. Not because it is popular you should take it, it has become popular because it is just marvellous. Worth it! | 50 most popular MOOCs of all | Time | Not because it is popular you | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| eL9HZ2ItEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | Very good course, but at the same time very hard. Unless you have quite a bit of experience programing, be prepared to spend at least 15 hours a week working on this class. The good news is that if you do spend that time, you will learn a lot. | good course, but at the same | Time | very hard. Unless you have quite | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eL9HZ2ItEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | Very good course, but at the same time very hard. Unless you have quite a bit of experience programing, be prepared to spend at least 15 hours a week working on this class. The good news is that if you do spend that time, you will learn a lot. | that if you do spend that | Time | you will learn a lot. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eLzp7w-NEeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | easy way to learn fields outside of my own in short amount of time | my own in short amount of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| emCu12atEeW2DA58V0Z6GQ | It´s an excelent course, with a lot of material to study for long time. The explanations are clear and step by step. Professor Dariusz Terefenko is a great teacher and also a great player. Their students play great demonstrations on explained topics. I learn a lot about, otherwise difficult topics, on jazz styles, jazz harmony and improvisation using modes and other techniques. All applied over 12 bar blues structure. | of material to study for long | Time | The explanations are clear and step | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| emCu12atEeW2DA58V0Z6GQ | Although I don't have any musical background I really enjoyed this course and have learned and understood a bit more about the blues. Thanks to the Professor and the musicians for giving their time and effort to make this MOOC a reality. Much appreciated. | and the musicians for giving their | Time | and effort to make this MOOC | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| ENhHCTboEeW8ZAoCexam_w | Very well done. The videos are well explained, with nice illustrations and examples to clearly understand each concept. The assignments are self directed and do not take too much time to write every week. I really recommend this month-long course for anyone who struggles with basic statistic and wants to know how and when to run an ANOVA, Chi-Square, Pearson Correlation. | and do not take too much | Time | to write every week. I really | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| ENhHCTboEeW8ZAoCexam_w | There is a lot of self-teaching with these courses because there are no professors present to reach out to with questions. In addition, the course staff do not always respond promptly nor are they fully knowledgeable about all aspects of error messages that may arise out of coding. At times the code that were provided in the lecture videos were out of date and a lot of time was spent on googling to find the updated code. This is definitely not a beginner coder course and I do not recommend it to anyone who has not coded before. | may arise out of coding. At | Time | the code that were provided in | Positive | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| ENhHCTboEeW8ZAoCexam_w | There is a lot of self-teaching with these courses because there are no professors present to reach out to with questions. In addition, the course staff do not always respond promptly nor are they fully knowledgeable about all aspects of error messages that may arise out of coding. At times the code that were provided in the lecture videos were out of date and a lot of time was spent on googling to find the updated code. This is definitely not a beginner coder course and I do not recommend it to anyone who has not coded before. | of date and a lot of | Time | was spent on googling to find | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| ENhHCTboEeW8ZAoCexam_w | This course is very interesting and every data scientist should take time and digest it. | and every data scientist should take | Time | and digest it. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| eo6NBCQPEeW5Rwo0txKkgQ | A very very helpful course that gives practical solutions in a classroom and school-wide setting. It was structured well and easy to follow. If I had one comment, it would be that some of the quizzes did not line up with the course so well (you had to study ahead to answer questions). Other than this, really worth the amount of time spent studying! | this, really worth the amount of | Time | spent studying! | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| eUhVWo2iEeWJIAqFKsey7w | 简直是毫无帮助。作业根本提交不了，无法通过的。It's a waste of time. | 简直是毫无帮助。作业根本提交不了，无法通过的。It's a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| eUhVWo2iEeWJIAqFKsey7w | bad useless garbage,this is the most bad online course i've take,just waste time | online course i've take, just waste | Time | | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An ok introduction to Swift Programming, but I can see people who do not have previous development experience struggling with this course. Also lecturers were virtually nonexistent on the forums to help with questions which is disappointing since it is a paid course which implies you are paying for their time and effort not just the certificate. Best advice for people taking this course is to get through the material as early as possible and give yourself as much time as possible to work on the project, don't wait till the last week to work on it. Would also suggest the following changes to improve the course and help people understand the material better: 1. Have a programming exercise to complete at the end of every week to prove you have understood the material taught, a quiz alone with 10 or less questions is not enough. The course ramps up way to quickly with the project if all you have been doing is following the videos, students should be practicing and proving they know the work far more often. 2. Provide a clearer project brief since it was clear many people did not understand all the requirements. 3. Provide a video of what the final project should do in general to make it even clearer. Overall I didn't have a bad experience with the course, just disappointed that it was really bear bones, there were too few opportunities to prove your understanding, it was poorly managed and the lack of interaction from the lecturers a massive problem when they are being paid to help out, not just provide videos and forget about the students. | implies you are paying for their | Time | and effort not just the certificate. | Negative | 0.65 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An ok introduction to Swift Programming, but I can see people who do not have previous development experience struggling with this course. Also lecturers were virtually nonexistent on the forums to help with questions which is disappointing since it is a paid course which implies you are paying for their time and effort not just the certificate. Best advice for people taking this course is to get through the material as early as possible and give yourself as much time as possible to work on the project, don't wait till the last week to work on it. Would also suggest the following changes to improve the course and help people understand the material better: 1. Have a programming exercise to complete at the end of every week to prove you have understood the material taught, a quiz alone with 10 or less questions is not enough. The course ramps up way to quickly with the project if all you have been doing is following the videos, students should be practicing and proving they know the work far more often. 2. Provide a clearer project brief since it was clear many people did not understand all the requirements. 3. Provide a video of what the final project should do in general to make it even clearer. Overall I didn't have a bad experience with the course, just disappointed that it was really bear bones, there were too few opportunities to prove your understanding, it was poorly managed and the lack of interaction from the lecturers a massive problem when they are being paid to help out, not just provide videos and forget about the students. | possible and give yourself as much | Time | as possible to work on the | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Videos are poorly done and leave a lot of useful details out. There is zero support from staff in the forums. If you take this course, plan on spending a lot of time doing research on external sources in order to gain an understanding of the very broad and lacking in detail videos. To improve this course, the instructors should: -provide links to at least one textbook on Swift -add Mentors to the course to help students in the forums -include a repository of code snippets for practice of the concepts | plan on spending a lot of | Time | doing research on external sources in | Negative | 0.87 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I taked this course as part of the entire especialization; this course alone does not allow you to create programs but helps you to understand how swift works and the logic behind; also there is a nice optional chapter to compare against objective-c. There are few instructions that need to be updated to a newer version of swift but are minimal and you can live with that. Starting the final assignment to the final week is a mistake: I would recommend to go as fast as possible in te previous tasks and then take time to do the assignment. | te previous tasks and then take | Time | to do the assignment. | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The videos are poorly done, and it's hard to follow with practicing in a Playground at the same time. Also, some of the optional material, is required for completing the assessment, which a bit unfair. The material covered in the videos is too basic to be able to apply the principles to a larger programme. | in a Playground at the same | Time | Also, some of the optional material, | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Thank you for the course. With all my respect to authors, I have something to say: I beleave all 4 cources in the spesialization could be combine to one. Looks like authors may invest more time and passion to it. I just skipped all videos with Parham Aarabi. | Looks like authors may invest more | Time | and passion to it. I just | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is a waste of time and money. I'm an experienced programmer, and I thought this would be a good introduction to Swift; it wasn't. The first two weeks were short, introductory programming lessons. Week 3, "Advanced Swift," consisted of one 12-minute video that barely scratches the surface of three separate topics. Many things that I would consider fundamentals for this type of programming course (classes, for example) were rarely even mentioned, much less taught and demonstrated. If you want to learn Swift, look elsewhere. Don't waste your time and money on this course. | This course is a waste of | Time | and money. I'm an experienced programmer, | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is a waste of time and money. I'm an experienced programmer, and I thought this would be a good introduction to Swift; it wasn't. The first two weeks were short, introductory programming lessons. Week 3, "Advanced Swift," consisted of one 12-minute video that barely scratches the surface of three separate topics. Many things that I would consider fundamentals for this type of programming course (classes, for example) were rarely even mentioned, much less taught and demonstrated. If you want to learn Swift, look elsewhere. Don't waste your time and money on this course. | Swift, look elsewhere. Don't waste your | Time | and money on this course. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The conversations some time confused! but in general the course is great! | The conversations some | Time | confused! but in general the course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Far less staid than some of the more traditional academic teaching formats in this science field. I was surprised I actually anaged to get through the introductory module but by the end of the course I was less inclined to want to attempt the end of module project simply because the instructions did not really provided sufficient indicators that guided newcomers to the subject of programming but in this science field it seems that is the norm with many introductory programming courses. Maybe the people teaching have forgotten what its like to start at the beginning and recall a time when they thought surely there is a better way in which to teach this subject that makes the connection between theory and practice and the relative interconnection much like bitesize stepping stones links a more plausible and achievable option for those unfamiliar in the field of computer science. Not sure why this aspect seems to fall short in CS but for some reason it does. I should imagine this course for many people who are either familiar with the fundamentals of programming and/or aufait with CS concepts on the whole and have already acquired the necessary basic skill set / knowledge base of programming, will find the subject and teachings rather informative and a move forward in the development of programming languages as the format in writing programs does depict a much simpler approach when compared to other languages. Sadly, for a complete beginner to CS this, in my opinion, fails to sufficiently guide or assist newcomers in building the confidence to later embark on a project that draws on the subject topics taught thus far and to that end its a bit of a shame as it tends to dampen your enthusiasm if you are interested in the field of computer science as that lack of clarification on what aspects relate to what factors does not become clear so when faced with the daunting task of the end of module project you may find yourself non-plussed wondering which topic relates to which task in the final project? I am sure other people will be inclined to disagree with my opinion on this but this is, after all, just my opinion, after giving the subject taster a try, the end result for me, was that the teaching methods were good as they appeared more relaxed and format was offered in a far more enjoyable way of teaching/learning a subject that, I felt, attempted to invoke or entice people where an interest in CS had been sparked and was perhaps aiming to offer a route in which to build the foundations of a programming language but then by the final week it was a case of well we have thrown this information your way, its now up to you to decipher what you need to apply to the which part of the final project and is done so under the guise of problem solving. The latter being a plausible concept I would find perhaps more applicable later on in the specialisation as you develop knowledge/skills. But to be incorporated into the very first module of this pathway it seems doing so is, what it seems like most introductory programming courses invoke, and, is quite a leap to embark upon especially without first being offered stepping stones sufficient enough to feel certain you have adequate understanding to be able to sift through the information provided and subsequently decide upon which aspects are relevant in order to attempt to accomplish the tasks set that ultimately form to complete the final project. Its actually through being guided by the experts whose teachings highlight to newcomers through practical visual sessions where we actually begin to learn where these interconnections link between these chunks of informational topics - all of which form the essential fundamental building blocks - and in so doing, that perhaps perceived initial 'spoon fed' approach then enables a newcomer to build sufficient skills and knowledge to then be able to actually 'develop' their confidence. Without the essential basic foundational mixture how is it possible to engage newcomers enough for them to determine when they will then feel equipped to attempt a final project? This stepping stone approach is surely the most effective way to equip a person new to a subject field so they can then broaden their knowledge base. Alas, in CS it seems the falling flat on your face so to speak is a preferential approach to learning in this field of study. Its such a shame these highly intellectual people who create these courses forget what its like to start at the very beginning and the time it takes and guidance needed in order for a person to be able to feel like they are ready to dive in and give a topic like this a whirl. Like I said, its only my opinion but this is where the interconnection and building of the knowledge base falls short at an early stage of development. | at the beginning and recall a | Time | when they thought surely there is | Positive | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Far less staid than some of the more traditional academic teaching formats in this science field. I was surprised I actually anaged to get through the introductory module but by the end of the course I was less inclined to want to attempt the end of module project simply because the instructions did not really provided sufficient indicators that guided newcomers to the subject of programming but in this science field it seems that is the norm with many introductory programming courses. Maybe the people teaching have forgotten what its like to start at the beginning and recall a time when they thought surely there is a better way in which to teach this subject that makes the connection between theory and practice and the relative interconnection much like bitesize stepping stones links a more plausible and achievable option for those unfamiliar in the field of computer science. Not sure why this aspect seems to fall short in CS but for some reason it does. I should imagine this course for many people who are either familiar with the fundamentals of programming and/or aufait with CS concepts on the whole and have already acquired the necessary basic skill set / knowledge base of programming, will find the subject and teachings rather informative and a move forward in the development of programming languages as the format in writing programs does depict a much simpler approach when compared to other languages. Sadly, for a complete beginner to CS this, in my opinion, fails to sufficiently guide or assist newcomers in building the confidence to later embark on a project that draws on the subject topics taught thus far and to that end its a bit of a shame as it tends to dampen your enthusiasm if you are interested in the field of computer science as that lack of clarification on what aspects relate to what factors does not become clear so when faced with the daunting task of the end of module project you may find yourself non-plussed wondering which topic relates to which task in the final project? I am sure other people will be inclined to disagree with my opinion on this but this is, after all, just my opinion, after giving the subject taster a try, the end result for me, was that the teaching methods were good as they appeared more relaxed and format was offered in a far more enjoyable way of teaching/learning a subject that, I felt, attempted to invoke or entice people where an interest in CS had been sparked and was perhaps aiming to offer a route in which to build the foundations of a programming language but then by the final week it was a case of well we have thrown this information your way, its now up to you to decipher what you need to apply to the which part of the final project and is done so under the guise of problem solving. The latter being a plausible concept I would find perhaps more applicable later on in the specialisation as you develop knowledge/skills. But to be incorporated into the very first module of this pathway it seems doing so is, what it seems like most introductory programming courses invoke, and, is quite a leap to embark upon especially without first being offered stepping stones sufficient enough to feel certain you have adequate understanding to be able to sift through the information provided and subsequently decide upon which aspects are relevant in order to attempt to accomplish the tasks set that ultimately form to complete the final project. Its actually through being guided by the experts whose teachings highlight to newcomers through practical visual sessions where we actually begin to learn where these interconnections link between these chunks of informational topics - all of which form the essential fundamental building blocks - and in so doing, that perhaps perceived initial 'spoon fed' approach then enables a newcomer to build sufficient skills and knowledge to then be able to actually 'develop' their confidence. Without the essential basic foundational mixture how is it possible to engage newcomers enough for them to determine when they will then feel equipped to attempt a final project? This stepping stone approach is surely the most effective way to equip a person new to a subject field so they can then broaden their knowledge base. Alas, in CS it seems the falling flat on your face so to speak is a preferential approach to learning in this field of study. Its such a shame these highly intellectual people who create these courses forget what its like to start at the very beginning and the time it takes and guidance needed in order for a person to be able to feel like they are ready to dive in and give a topic like this a whirl. Like I said, its only my opinion but this is where the interconnection and building of the knowledge base falls short at an early stage of development. | at the very beginning and the | Time | it takes and guidance needed in | Positive | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Loved it. allow time for the Final assignment. it can take awhile to do correctly | Loved it. allow | Time | for the Final assignment. it can | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Should be lecture by Professor instead of BS student. The content was not well organized. Also should prepare slides and explain the Swift for more details. More exercises needed in each weeks lecture. Hopefully, this course should improve next time. | Hopefully, this course should improve next | Time | | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This is a well designed course that is clear in what it focuses on to give you a good foundation. That said, there is so much more to learn. Make sure you look at the final project after each module to get an idea for all the opportunities to apply the optional materials. You can still pass without doing using the concepts in the optional sections but there is time to get even more out of the final project if you prepare and explore. | the optional sections but there is | Time | to get even more out of | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is good to start with Swift programming in IOS. this had help me a lot, while not having much time to devote. I appreciate this. | a lot, while not having much | Time | to devote. I appreciate this. | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course needs major improvement. Lectures included errors in the code. While showing code in video lectures instructor was quick to delete code, not giving time for students to view and understand what had just been shown. On Dec 15, two weeks before due date of final project, large portions of all weeks of the course were changed, requiring going back through to complete these new lectures. No adjustment was made to the due date. Requirements for the final project are vague and confusing and I am not able to submit the final project by the due date in about 2 hours. If this issue is not addressed I will need to consider adjusting my star rating. This experience casts a negative impression for me on the Coursera platform and University of Toronto teaching staff. I'm disappointed. | quick to delete code, not giving | Time | for students to view and understand | Negative | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | a programming course to show real | Time | programming sometimes. But to do this | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | But to do this all the | Time | is a bit too much and | Positive | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | this course I need lots of | Time | to complete the quiz in contrast | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | programming background at all. some other | Time | a concept is explained so fast | Negative | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| 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. | looks extremely raw. Half of lectures | Time | is talking about nothing and it | Negative | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm dropping this course because it's just SO poorly conceived. Three weeks in, and I can't really articulate what I've actually learned (which leads me to believe that the answer is "not very much"). The major problem is that this course has no clear objective. And I don't mean that the individual lessons don't have objectives - I actually mean that the entire course doesn't know what it wants to be and the instructors seem to have bypassed this critical question. I have a background in Python, and I was under the impression that this course would teach me how to program in Swift (seems like a fairly straightforward goal). But it isn't that at all. If I were to summarize this course (perhaps a little uncharitably, because I'm annoyed at the time I wasted) it would be: some dudes with a computer talk about some cool features of a programming language. I'm fairly baffled by the fact that there was no thought put into which examples might best illustrate the features they were trying to teach. Which-examples-might-best-illustrate-the-feature-I-am-trying-to-teach is pedagogy 101. They would regularly work through examples just to conclude "actually that's a bad example". This is pretty strong evidence that there was no lesson planning involved. There were also no practice exercises, no posting of pieces of illustrative code, and hence, no way to actually get good at programming in Swift (unless it's self directed, in which case - why bother with the formality of taking a course on Coursera?). | uncharitably, because I'm annoyed at the | Time | I wasted) it would be: some | Negative | 0.72 | 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. | Seems like tutors have not spent | Time | on proper preparation. Free courses on | Negative | 0.91 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Felt like the teachers weren't putting much time into preparation - felt random and disorganized. I didn't finish the course - I'll watch the cs193p lectures from Stanford instead. | like the teachers weren't putting much | Time | into preparation - felt random and | Neutral | 0.50 | 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. | instructors hesitate and doubt all the | Time | during the recording of the screen. | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Awesome! I've been looking for the relevant courses for a long time. I can't find any better course that this one. | the relevant courses for a long | Time | I can't find any better course | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very disorganized. More than a course, it seems more like 2 students learning along with you. The lessons have 0 preparation and they come up with examples that do not work half of the time during the video itself. I do not recommend this course (and as a matter of fact, the entire specialization) to anyone. | do not work half of the | Time | during the video itself. I do | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The course need more improvements in terms of material, presentation and execution. The two presenters format didn't work well as it made the lecture look informal. The material need better preparation and it seems at times to be ad-hoc coding. A few videos were not edited properly resulting in lengthy black screens after the presenters were done talking. | better preparation and it seems at | Time | to be ad-hoc coding. A few | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is poorly designed. What course on a programming language jumps first into how to use the debugger and what went wrong with a program? You are not introducing Swift, you are introducing xcode (and doing a terrible job of it). Also, I have been using xcode and Swift for 8 months now and producing some really good work, but I could only get 3/7 on your quiz because you have written questions with the purpose of tricking people instead of reinforcing or checking knowledge of the content. When you teach a new application, consider introducing the interface first. Explain what the various areas are, what they are needed for, and how to control them. This orients the user in the application and helps them to find their way around when they are trying to reinforce your teachings later. The presentation for this course is so unprofessional. It's like a running commentary on a movie instead of an educational presentation. I felt like I was listening to two geeks stuffing around and having a good time, instead of people who are professional teachers! I'm so incredibly disappointed with this course. Back to the wonderful work of Paul Hegarty from Stanford University on iTunes University and YouTube for me. University of Toronto - you should really consider what your teaching staff are doing before you unleash them on the world. | stuffing around and having a good | Time | instead of people who are professional | Negative | 0.66 | 1.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Not for beginners in the slightest. Enjoyed the videos. But the quiz just made me feel stupid as I didn't have a clue on any of the equations and simulators I was supposed to use. It got me thinking of how ignorant clever people continue to be! Every time a smart person comes up with a new theory it's taken as fact. Give it a couple of decades and someone will prove it wrong. The sun orbiting us proving wrong, easth is flat, gas giants only orbit outside the habitable zone etc etc etc. So when will we learn that just because something happens on this planet doesn't mean it will, has happened elsewhere. The deepest depths of the ocean have life forms, yet we'd perish. So who's to say life forms can't exact on a planet, moon that is nothing like the earth! The world is still at the centre of the universe to these academics! | clever people continue to be! Every | Time | a smart person comes up with | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | As a quick overview to modern astronomy and cosmology this is a very worthwhile course. Highly informative and well presented. Material is detailed enough to provide an understanding of the topics covered and hints at more complexity to encourage further exploration. Marked down to four stars solely on the basis of the review questions. Some of these are ambiguous or have a lack of clarity. Otherwise this course, given the level and time allocation, would rate 5 stars. | this course, given the level and | Time | allocation, would rate 5 stars. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Too much time required. The first Quiz had almost nothing covered in the video lectures. I saved all transcripts and was unable to answer the questions. The Sim's... I have never seen anything like that and again - it most certainly wasn't covered in the lectures. Disappointed in this course. It took 3 hours for each segment of the first week... not 3 to 4 as was stated. Leaving this course. | Too much | Time | required. The first Quiz had almost | Negative | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | What a wonder and enlightening course, spiced with a little humor. I have always wanted to study music, but didn't have the money or time. Now in my retirement, I can enjoy what I have always wanted to do. I looking forward to other music courses. | but didn't have the money or | Time | Now in my retirement, I can | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | I feel Professor Craig Wright offers a comprehensive, varied, accessible and fun overview of a very large subject, starting right at the beginning of musical history and bringing you up to the present day. He uses a wide variety of visual and audio resources including relevant works of art, architecture, artefacts, sketches, quotes from historical documents, surviving musical scores, music recordings, videos of live orchestral performance, music animations, costume, period instruments and interviews with musical colleagues of his who are able to share their expertise. In addition to all this he offers us his own photographs from his pilgrimages to cities such as Vienna, which adds further to the course's personal touch. What comes across throughout Wright's course videos is his immense love of, and desire to share that love of classical music, which for me is a major factor in what makes the course so appealing. I also enjoy his sense of humour and efforts to appeal to a younger generation (Wright is in his 70s). At more than one point in the course he adopts fancy dress to reflect the period he is exploring. A highlight I feel is when the course features a clip from one of his lectures at Yale University where he enrolls some colleagues to enact a scene from Don Giovanni in which Wright plays an angry father, slain by Don Giovanni in a duel. It is a touching (and amusing) example of his good humour and ability to have fun with his students. My only criticism would be his own piano playing which is often rushed and inaccurate, but I feel this is largely due to the time constraints of filming the videos. By his own admission, he realised early on in life that he was not up to the challenge of being a concert pianist - he is primarily a musicologist, not a pianist. Every piece of music touched on in the course is available via the course Spotify playlist (extremely helpful) so there is no difficulty in listening to professional recordings of all the pieces discussed. I would highly recommend this course to anyone seeking a background knowledge of the evolution of musical history. | this is largely due to the | Time | constraints of filming the videos. By | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Very interesting course about the development of classical music. By giving comparisons between music, architecture, visual arts, literature and by giving some historical background of the specific time periods, it give a good idea how the music evolved. | some historical background of the specific | Time | periods, it give a good idea | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Fantastic course. Thank you for such a great material collection; my time with you was most enjoyable and I have learned a lot. | such a great material collection; my | Time | with you was most enjoyable and | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | I'm a big fan of Classical music specially of the classical and romantic eras (I listen and practice on piano - my ultimate instrument - too) since many years ago, there were always questions rolling on my head regarding these eras and their most important composers but i never got the guts to search deeply for my answers among the scattered information every where, all this happened before i participated in this course. On this introductory course, i gained a lot of information and my perceptions of the music generally is expanded hugely in a way i never expected :) :) :) Before this course i was an ordinary listener, now i'm a much way better listener; and i'm sure this will have a positive effect on my piano practicing too. Thank you very much Craig Wright, you really did a great job and efforts on simplifying a lot of information and display it in a very easy, organized, and pleasant way, and thank you very much Yale University and every one who participated, supported, and made available any information during the time of this course...you all really made a difference in my life. | made available any information during the | Time | of this course. . . you | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| eV-OTCTuEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Very comprehensive materials compared to similar course which I took also on line from my school that I had to pay. I don't wish to diminish the training and education of my teacher on line because she was a very well equipped professor of classical music too that I really learned a lot from her. This time, it's almost like a continuing education for me. Thanks to the very well versed professor of his subject. | learned a lot from her. This | Time | it's almost like a continuing education | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | The discovery of David Christians approach, first by reading his "Maps of Time" and listening to some of his presentations on-line, then by attending this course was an eye-opener to me. I now try to explain the importance of the subject to as many people as I can. Not only adults or university students, but mid-level students as well deserve to be exposed to the view of Big History, It changes one's perceptions of the past and enhances one's apprehensions of the future. | by reading his " Maps of | Time | and listening to some of his | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Totally enjoyable. The videos are professional, varied and so informative. Comparing the quiz to some others , I found they were better formulated and less ambiguous. Personally I feel I learned an amazing amount in a short time span and bother the content and pace were stimulating! so bravo! This is the type of general knowledge everyone should have but probably 90 % only have a rough, inaccurate or no awareness whatsoever. This could be run even at the school level, it could stimulate future scientists. | an amazing amount in a short | Time | span and bother the content and | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Excellent course. It is worth your time to to learn about our scientific origin story. | Excellent course. It is worth your | Time | to to learn about our scientific | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Thank You! I have been waiting for a course like this for a very long time.... | like this for a very long | Time | . . . | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | This is definitely my favorite course on Coursera and anywhere else in internet! So glad I accidentally ran into it! Under a name that doesn't tell much about the content there is a real jewel - a multidisciplinary course that is truly able to connect many of the dots and make perfect sense of all these endless math and science, history and many other classes we all had to sit throughout our school years. I loved every minute of this course, all the experts zooming into subjects, all of additional materials (especially Crushcourse videos). Big History course is awesome for those always asking "but why?" questions. A very big thank you to The Big History course team for finding time and passion for making it available to everyone in the world! | Big History course team for finding | Time | and passion for making it available | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Great course, fantastic presenters, smooth sailing and at the same time though inspiring. | smooth sailing and at the same | Time | though inspiring. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | I find the week 6 of this course completely irrelevant. Also, I'm attending courses on Coursera to learn and quizzes are IMO an essential part of that process, but definitely not essays. For me personally, essays are just waste of time and there's nothing beneficial about them. Another thing that bugs me is how questionably and often misleadingly are thermodynamical laws interpreted by the professors in this course. | personally, essays are just waste of | Time | and there's nothing beneficial about them. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 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! | the video's because of lack of | Time | but really was sorry when reaching | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Excellent lecturers and high-quality material to study, although the course is heavily centered on human History as opposed to Big History - i.e. early Universe and its development over a time span of billions of years. | Universe and its development over a | Time | span of billions of years. | Positive | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | This is a good course. I liked the idea of the 9 thresholds of increasing complexity, with the energy required, the Goldilocks conditions, and emergence. I want to think about this a bit more, and see how I can apply it to other, smaller, thresholds. I like the idea of restoring the idea of a story to history. It's time to think about whether we should be moving into the driver's seat, and whether we have any idea of where we want to go. What would it take to make this a great course? The Discussion Forums don't seem to sparkle the way they do with some other courses I have done. I have completed other Coursera offerings, such as Origins (University of Copenhagen Natural History Museum), Our Earth (Climate, History, and Processes - University of Manchester), and Introduction to Genetics & Evolution (Duke University), and there was a lot of discussion among students. I felt that I learned a lot from the discussions, and not just the formal lectures. I also noticed the lecturers participating in the discussions. I cannot understand why this hasn't happened on this course, but it is part of my feeling that this course has a way to go yet. | of a story to history. It's | Time | to think about whether we should | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Wonderful course. The resources are very useful - I spend more time going through those, than watching the videos. The timelines and glossaries are very helpful. Everything is very well done. It's also interesting to have the variety of instructors with different backgrounds. If I'd had a course like this when I was in high school or college, I might have become a geologist. Fascinating stuff. | very useful - I spend more | Time | going through those, than watching the | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Enjoyable course and I appreciated the interdisciplinary nature. At times, I felt like I wanted to delve deeper into the content, but I understand that this MOOC, like most others, are breadth courses designed for incoming Freshmen. | I appreciated the interdisciplinary nature. At | Time | I felt like I wanted to | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | This course is blowing my mind (in a good way). It has been a long time since I've felt the wonder of the world (and universe) of which I am a part. In addition, this course is expanding the language with which I can talk about and understand my environments (new and old). The information is well-organised and concise and the resources are a good blend of academic, creative, informative and fun and the lecturers are knowledgable and passionate. I hope this field floods the world's places of education. | way). It has been a long | Time | since I've felt the wonder of | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | It was such a fascinating journey through time, knowledge, within myself and into the universe! I loved every moment of it and now I am touched because it's over. Nevertheless, I know Big History is in me, just as I am part of It (as small as, and apparently, insignificant one may seem) and I am full of gratitude towards the entire warm-hearted, generous, intelligent, very highly skilled and talented Big History team. Thank you very much indeed! | was such a fascinating journey through | Time | knowledge, within myself and into the | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Finally! A creation myth based on evidence and multiple scientific disciplines for all humans is here! The time for stories based on speculation and superstition for the chosen group is finally over. | for all humans is here! The | Time | for stories based on speculation and | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | the last assignment is too time consuming, I didn't completed it though I finished all the other assignments. | the last assignment is too | Time | consuming, I didn't completed it though | Negative | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| EwR6zhSDEeWCWhKuhISYpw | Very nice overview, but it seemed to be too much information for the limited time. There should be a separate six week course for each threshold. | too much information for the limited | Time | There should be a separate six | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This is a great course. It is challenging, but that comes with the territory if you want to write code. I like the fact that the assignments are challenging and long; the only issue I had is that I work full-time and hardly have the 20+ hours a week to spend on the programming assignments. Also, the estimated times listed for each assignments are not realistic for somebody learning the topics in this course for the first time. I would recommend this course to anybody wanting to learn how to develop web apps and api web services using Rails with MongoDB as the backend. Just be prepared to dedicate a lot of time each week. Especially week3's assigment. I ran out of time and had to transfer to a new session to complete the course because of my full-time job. It would be beneficial for students to have a spare week, in between the third and fourth assignment. | the programming assignments. Also, the estimated | Time | listed for each assignments are not | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This is a great course. It is challenging, but that comes with the territory if you want to write code. I like the fact that the assignments are challenging and long; the only issue I had is that I work full-time and hardly have the 20+ hours a week to spend on the programming assignments. Also, the estimated times listed for each assignments are not realistic for somebody learning the topics in this course for the first time. I would recommend this course to anybody wanting to learn how to develop web apps and api web services using Rails with MongoDB as the backend. Just be prepared to dedicate a lot of time each week. Especially week3's assigment. I ran out of time and had to transfer to a new session to complete the course because of my full-time job. It would be beneficial for students to have a spare week, in between the third and fourth assignment. | in this course for the first | Time | I would recommend this course to | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This is a great course. It is challenging, but that comes with the territory if you want to write code. I like the fact that the assignments are challenging and long; the only issue I had is that I work full-time and hardly have the 20+ hours a week to spend on the programming assignments. Also, the estimated times listed for each assignments are not realistic for somebody learning the topics in this course for the first time. I would recommend this course to anybody wanting to learn how to develop web apps and api web services using Rails with MongoDB as the backend. Just be prepared to dedicate a lot of time each week. Especially week3's assigment. I ran out of time and had to transfer to a new session to complete the course because of my full-time job. It would be beneficial for students to have a spare week, in between the third and fourth assignment. | prepared to dedicate a lot of | Time | each week. Especially week3's assigment. I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This is a great course. It is challenging, but that comes with the territory if you want to write code. I like the fact that the assignments are challenging and long; the only issue I had is that I work full-time and hardly have the 20+ hours a week to spend on the programming assignments. Also, the estimated times listed for each assignments are not realistic for somebody learning the topics in this course for the first time. I would recommend this course to anybody wanting to learn how to develop web apps and api web services using Rails with MongoDB as the backend. Just be prepared to dedicate a lot of time each week. Especially week3's assigment. I ran out of time and had to transfer to a new session to complete the course because of my full-time job. It would be beneficial for students to have a spare week, in between the third and fourth assignment. | week3's assigment. I ran out of | Time | and had to transfer to a | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The material was was too much for the estimated time given to spend on the course per week. The assignments are very lengthy and the grading doesn't always conform to what would be intuitive. Some gems used in the course material are also old versions. There are entries in the db seed data that cause trouble, leading to intensive debugging and modification of given files that require a much more experienced programmer to figure out. | was too much for the estimated | Time | given to spend on the course | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Good course about NoSQL MongoDB. I learned a lot about the course but it would have been better if the instructor would have given some emphasis on programming with Unix machines like Macs. He used windows and in many cases I would run into problems like running Mongoid by including Gem files that he provided. I had to downgrade from rails 4 to 3 and then to 5, etc hitting StackOverflow every time to sort out technical issues. | to 5, etc hitting StackOverflow every | Time | to sort out technical issues. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Overall good course with a lot of examples. Though, some important steps seems to be missing, so could not follow along with all the demos. Had to spend some unpredictable amount of time digging into some questions (probably, it is fine, but the difference between 2 previous courses and this one in the program is vivid). I had a problem installing 'doorkeeper-mongodb' and it does not seem that this problem for a number of users. Good that it was not in the final project. | to spend some unpredictable amount of | Time | digging into some questions (probably, it | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course was a challenge. Mostly because some core requirements of the assignments were not explained in the lectures. I spent more time searching google for information than I did the lecture videos because A. the lecture videos are not named or indexed in such a way as to make it easy to figure out which video to rewatch and B. in many cases the particular thing I was trying to do wasn't covered at all. It may be the instructors teaching style to get you to research yourself but I could have done that without paying for the course. | in the lectures. I spent more | Time | searching google for information than I | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The course's assignments (3 so far) are not very well designed. It takes me more time to search online and on the lecture's videos for information than to actually write and come to a solution. The lecture's videos show very little coding and they're more focused on explaining (redundantly) a key concept. I believe it would be much more easier for other people taking this course later on if the videos were more code-oriented. Greetings. | well designed. It takes me more | Time | to search online and on the | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | well done! all about i have to know about mongodb, but the assignment are too much time expensive for who have a job, like me | but the assignment are too much | Time | expensive for who have a job, | Negative | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Saps away a lot of time for beginners, but every hour spent is worth it! Best course so far in the specialization. | Saps away a lot of | Time | for beginners, but every hour spent | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The layout of this course is extremely well reasoned out. Each module gives important stepping stones for the students both to understand and to get practical skills to use the material after the course. For me it was an extra bonus to learn about teh Rails API in the 4th week of the course. I will surely need that in the future. All assignments include very thorough guidance on how you can check your own work one step at a time all the way through. In fact I have never before attended a course where so much effort had been but into that part by the teachers. Much praise for that. The graded assignments were hard. I had to put in a quite considerable effort in each of them, especially week 3. Much more work than I had anticipated. However I cannot point to any part of the material that could easily have been left out. Everything we learned seemed useful and important. So in spite of the hard work I am happy that I stayed in there to the end. | own work one step at a | Time | all the way through. In fact | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An unexpectedly disappointing, and in fact, downright awful course. The lectures waste a good share of time as in places they barely scratch the surface of what is further required to be implemented in the assignments. The assignments themselves inherit the nice modular spec-test driven spirit of the first two classes. However, the instructions are mostly quite vague or even misleading, occasionally dropping some “hints”, which are often either not helpful, or just offer to copy-paste a quarter page of code. The tasks are very (and by “very" I mean EXTREMELY) long, tedious, boring to tears and to the point when you start to wonder if the authors are trolling the students. How about a 53 (yes, that is fifty three!) pages of assignment for the 3d week? To be fair, not all of this is the task statement, there is a lot of test code as well, but you know.. even one third of 53 is an impressive volume for a 4 weeks course (you get re-enrolled if you fail to be fair). Took me 44 hours of pure coding time (according to WakaTime) to finish the course. I have passed tens of courses on Coursera, and this one is by far the worst. That is taking into consideration that I would not rather call any other course (of those I have taken) “a bad one”. I suggest saving time and money by buying a book on Mongo and another one on Rails instead. I do believe though that the course is very green and certainly has to undergo some refinements and I will be happy to see future reviews shadow this one as obsolete. | lectures waste a good share of | Time | as in places they barely scratch | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An unexpectedly disappointing, and in fact, downright awful course. The lectures waste a good share of time as in places they barely scratch the surface of what is further required to be implemented in the assignments. The assignments themselves inherit the nice modular spec-test driven spirit of the first two classes. However, the instructions are mostly quite vague or even misleading, occasionally dropping some “hints”, which are often either not helpful, or just offer to copy-paste a quarter page of code. The tasks are very (and by “very" I mean EXTREMELY) long, tedious, boring to tears and to the point when you start to wonder if the authors are trolling the students. How about a 53 (yes, that is fifty three!) pages of assignment for the 3d week? To be fair, not all of this is the task statement, there is a lot of test code as well, but you know.. even one third of 53 is an impressive volume for a 4 weeks course (you get re-enrolled if you fail to be fair). Took me 44 hours of pure coding time (according to WakaTime) to finish the course. I have passed tens of courses on Coursera, and this one is by far the worst. That is taking into consideration that I would not rather call any other course (of those I have taken) “a bad one”. I suggest saving time and money by buying a book on Mongo and another one on Rails instead. I do believe though that the course is very green and certainly has to undergo some refinements and I will be happy to see future reviews shadow this one as obsolete. | me 44 hours of pure coding | Time | (according to WakaTime) to finish the | Negative | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| eXbmvDe9EeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An unexpectedly disappointing, and in fact, downright awful course. The lectures waste a good share of time as in places they barely scratch the surface of what is further required to be implemented in the assignments. The assignments themselves inherit the nice modular spec-test driven spirit of the first two classes. However, the instructions are mostly quite vague or even misleading, occasionally dropping some “hints”, which are often either not helpful, or just offer to copy-paste a quarter page of code. The tasks are very (and by “very" I mean EXTREMELY) long, tedious, boring to tears and to the point when you start to wonder if the authors are trolling the students. How about a 53 (yes, that is fifty three!) pages of assignment for the 3d week? To be fair, not all of this is the task statement, there is a lot of test code as well, but you know.. even one third of 53 is an impressive volume for a 4 weeks course (you get re-enrolled if you fail to be fair). Took me 44 hours of pure coding time (according to WakaTime) to finish the course. I have passed tens of courses on Coursera, and this one is by far the worst. That is taking into consideration that I would not rather call any other course (of those I have taken) “a bad one”. I suggest saving time and money by buying a book on Mongo and another one on Rails instead. I do believe though that the course is very green and certainly has to undergo some refinements and I will be happy to see future reviews shadow this one as obsolete. | “a bad one”. I suggest saving | Time | and money by buying a book | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| EZVzungdEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Really instructive course and exceptional teaching, discussion boards were a bit barren but maybe that was due to the lack of mentors at the time. | the lack of mentors at the | Time | | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| EZVzungdEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | I've enjoyed "The Craft of Setting and Description." It's given me a good chance to spend some time focusing on the details that matter. I've learned a lot about what to include where setting and description are concerned and what to leave out. It's been a very good course. | a good chance to spend some | Time | focusing on the details that matter. | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| EZVzungdEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | What a great course. It was accessible, but at the same time challenging. Wonderful! | was accessible, but at the same | Time | challenging. Wonderful! | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | The course was everything and more than I expected. As I had been out of academic writing for such a long time it gave me a way to get back into it without too much pressure. I wanted to start studying again and wasn't sure what i would do. Your course got me to focus and think about why and what I wanted to really study. The readings were informative because they were so precise. This course made a real impression on me and now I really want to study more importantly I have a plan and a better understanding of what I want to do. Thank you and a must for any would-be researcher. | academic writing for such a long | Time | it gave me a way to | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | It is like for kids, I think all courses must mention their target audience. Contents, Videos, talks nothing was value for time. | Videos, talks nothing was value for | Time | | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| fCKQimXqEeSuUyIAC0mIhA | it´s very useful, pragmatic and didactic at the same time. Thank you to all the team that make it posible. | pragmatic and didactic at the same | Time | Thank you to all the team | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Very interesting. I like the real world examples and the cases for the projects. The course is worth to spend time efforts and even money! Great Job | The course is worth to spend | Time | efforts and even money! Great Job | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The course offered an interesting overview and introduction to digital marketing; it is also a good start to the specialization in Digital Marketing. This was the first time I have taken a Coursera course and was able to complete it, and I've tried several. Quite often, the content is just too difficult to wade through without 1:1 human support. I think the workload was pitched correctly. I also liked how some theory was taught, and some research based on the theory. It is not just a bunch of case studies. There is an effort to describe the general principles that can apply across both firms and specific technologies, although there is a lot of both (firms and technologies) addressed as well. The most useful part of the course was a rather extensive discussion around pay what you want (PWYW), and the theory behind that, and the supporting case-based and research-based evidence, is really compelling. I plan to use a PWYW strategy as I develop my online startup. Thanks, Coursera and University of Illinois! On the negative side (and there's not much of that), some of the interviews of students on the U of I quad were ridiculously pointless. They really offered nothing of great value and took up substantial time. They were too anecdotal and at times the resulting content worked against the principles being taught in the course. I would rather see user-generated content, created by students and grads of the course, perhaps, from around the world, each discussing some aspect of that unit's topic. Just focusing on student interviews at U of I seems pretty parochial. I would also love to participate in UGC for a newsletter spinning off from this course. They use the courage presumably to extend the U of I community, but here's the thing: it creates its own community, and U of I would be well-served to re-oriented around it, rather than assuming that the only path forward is the reverse. Again, this is one of the most successful courses at Coursera. So maybe this is the direction for U of I to be heading...For example, I would anticipate offers from U or I for how they can get me into additional non-traditional business (or other) Coursera courses, or U of I courses or programs, or heck, teaching for U o I. Anyway, embrace the disruption! | Digital Marketing. This was the first | Time | I have taken a Coursera course | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The course offered an interesting overview and introduction to digital marketing; it is also a good start to the specialization in Digital Marketing. This was the first time I have taken a Coursera course and was able to complete it, and I've tried several. Quite often, the content is just too difficult to wade through without 1:1 human support. I think the workload was pitched correctly. I also liked how some theory was taught, and some research based on the theory. It is not just a bunch of case studies. There is an effort to describe the general principles that can apply across both firms and specific technologies, although there is a lot of both (firms and technologies) addressed as well. The most useful part of the course was a rather extensive discussion around pay what you want (PWYW), and the theory behind that, and the supporting case-based and research-based evidence, is really compelling. I plan to use a PWYW strategy as I develop my online startup. Thanks, Coursera and University of Illinois! On the negative side (and there's not much of that), some of the interviews of students on the U of I quad were ridiculously pointless. They really offered nothing of great value and took up substantial time. They were too anecdotal and at times the resulting content worked against the principles being taught in the course. I would rather see user-generated content, created by students and grads of the course, perhaps, from around the world, each discussing some aspect of that unit's topic. Just focusing on student interviews at U of I seems pretty parochial. I would also love to participate in UGC for a newsletter spinning off from this course. They use the courage presumably to extend the U of I community, but here's the thing: it creates its own community, and U of I would be well-served to re-oriented around it, rather than assuming that the only path forward is the reverse. Again, this is one of the most successful courses at Coursera. So maybe this is the direction for U of I to be heading...For example, I would anticipate offers from U or I for how they can get me into additional non-traditional business (or other) Coursera courses, or U of I courses or programs, or heck, teaching for U o I. Anyway, embrace the disruption! | great value and took up substantial | Time | They were too anecdotal and at | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The course offered an interesting overview and introduction to digital marketing; it is also a good start to the specialization in Digital Marketing. This was the first time I have taken a Coursera course and was able to complete it, and I've tried several. Quite often, the content is just too difficult to wade through without 1:1 human support. I think the workload was pitched correctly. I also liked how some theory was taught, and some research based on the theory. It is not just a bunch of case studies. There is an effort to describe the general principles that can apply across both firms and specific technologies, although there is a lot of both (firms and technologies) addressed as well. The most useful part of the course was a rather extensive discussion around pay what you want (PWYW), and the theory behind that, and the supporting case-based and research-based evidence, is really compelling. I plan to use a PWYW strategy as I develop my online startup. Thanks, Coursera and University of Illinois! On the negative side (and there's not much of that), some of the interviews of students on the U of I quad were ridiculously pointless. They really offered nothing of great value and took up substantial time. They were too anecdotal and at times the resulting content worked against the principles being taught in the course. I would rather see user-generated content, created by students and grads of the course, perhaps, from around the world, each discussing some aspect of that unit's topic. Just focusing on student interviews at U of I seems pretty parochial. I would also love to participate in UGC for a newsletter spinning off from this course. They use the courage presumably to extend the U of I community, but here's the thing: it creates its own community, and U of I would be well-served to re-oriented around it, rather than assuming that the only path forward is the reverse. Again, this is one of the most successful courses at Coursera. So maybe this is the direction for U of I to be heading...For example, I would anticipate offers from U or I for how they can get me into additional non-traditional business (or other) Coursera courses, or U of I courses or programs, or heck, teaching for U o I. Anyway, embrace the disruption! | They were too anecdotal and at | Time | the resulting content worked against the | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The content of the course is very good. What I would improve are the Quizes; I'd concentrate more on key stuff, not include any questions concerning irrelevant details. Some of the assignment questions were also a bit unclear and the rating scales did not make sense at times. | scales did not make sense at | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 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. | I'm taking this at the same | Time | as I'm taking Wharton's Week 1 | Positive | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| 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. | a lecture and counting how many | Time | the professor pushes his glasses back | Positive | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I think the content was quite interesting; as someone new to marketing, I was really looking forward to the lectures and exercises. However, the content was simply too much for me to complete. It's a bit ironic that a course about marketing missed its market. To give a bit more detail: there were 12 video lectures, 3 assignments that had to be done days before the end of the week to be peer-reviewed, and then I had to peer review others work, while also going through all the assigned reading. It seemed more like a courseload for a full time student or perhaps a part-time student. As online students typically are neither, I'm surprised the course content wasn't better managed. I take a lot of notes, so perhaps that's what slowed me down, but I also have a full time job and I intern on the weekends. I was hoping this course could easily be done in the evening hours. Other coursera courses provided an excellent balance of content and courseload, I'm disappointed that this course wasn't one of them. It seemed very useful and interesting. | like a courseload for a full | Time | student or perhaps a part-time student. | Negative | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I think the content was quite interesting; as someone new to marketing, I was really looking forward to the lectures and exercises. However, the content was simply too much for me to complete. It's a bit ironic that a course about marketing missed its market. To give a bit more detail: there were 12 video lectures, 3 assignments that had to be done days before the end of the week to be peer-reviewed, and then I had to peer review others work, while also going through all the assigned reading. It seemed more like a courseload for a full time student or perhaps a part-time student. As online students typically are neither, I'm surprised the course content wasn't better managed. I take a lot of notes, so perhaps that's what slowed me down, but I also have a full time job and I intern on the weekends. I was hoping this course could easily be done in the evening hours. Other coursera courses provided an excellent balance of content and courseload, I'm disappointed that this course wasn't one of them. It seemed very useful and interesting. | but I also have a full | Time | job and I intern on the | Positive | 0.92 | 2.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | I undertook this marketing course as a marketer keen to make sure I was up to date and thinking about new ideas. It was a shame redlaser.com is no longer active, however I'm sure there are other tools, the course content just needs to be updated. I liked the Quad elements but found the Quizzes a bit frustrating particularly when they asked questions for which the answer was covered in the next topic. Overall however, time well spend. Thanks to Aric and team. | in the next topic. Overall however, | Time | well spend. Thanks to Aric and | Positive | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | It was an interesting course. General marketing concepts were discussed, marketing mix, many examples and many essays. Unfortunately, I can not say in which areas the course was bad) This may limit development within the allotted time? :) Thank you for the great class! | may limit development within the allotted | Time | :) Thank you for the great | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | This course is requirement of time. | This course is requirement of | Time | | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Videos rather slow and don't keep you focus. Voice of the professor is rather low key and slow. Hard to pay attention at times. Even though there are examples, it should be more interactive with other videos rather than links of text. | slow. Hard to pay attention at | Time | Even though there are examples, it | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | The course content was comprehensive, thorough and required note taking with preparation for quizzes. Solid academically. Some of the assignments required use of third party applications and websites that did function as anticipated or are no longer supported. Peer grading was very poor. It frequently seemed students did not read submissions, off handedly grading. At times comments did not match the scores, such as "nice work," or "good job," while giving only 3 stars. | read submissions, off handedly grading. At | Time | comments did not match the scores, | Negative | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | This course is fantastic. The americans are objective, practical and all the things that we are learning have an effective application. Our schools and teachers in Brazil have a lot to learn about how to be pragmatic to focus the energy and time to provide solutions that can improve the life of our people. | pragmatic to focus the energy and | Time | to provide solutions that can improve | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | This first course i was pretty awesome, very insightful yet entertaining at the same time. | insightful yet entertaining at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Love it! Class really in-tune with our time. Great teacher. Simple language, clear messages. Straight to the point examples. Easy take-aways that I can actually re-use the next day (vs usually academic and highly complex learnings from other marketing classes). | it! Class really in-tune with our | Time | Great teacher. Simple language, clear messages. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| FDKAdNsuEeSEcyIAC2mPOQ | Great course! I've been very satisfied with the topics treated and about the teaching model. The exercises and the practical assignments have often been time consuming and this is why I found them effective and useful. Thank you | the practical assignments have often been | Time | consuming and this is why I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | This is the first time I have learnt Epidemiology. It's give me a chance to know professional information about it. As I thought, It's a difficult cause. So many definitions are difficult to distinguish. I hope in the future I could learn more, especially in pharmacoepidemiology. Thank you very much. | This is the first | Time | I have learnt Epidemiology. It's give | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I struggle with Epidemiology and Statistics, and this course helped me to get a better understanding of the teories of Epidemiology and helped me to use it in practic. Thank you for putting so much time in building these modules. | Thank you for putting so much | Time | in building these modules. | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Thank you for encouraging me to continue the courses and quiz! I was moved by the motivational emails of the course for the first time since I started Coursera. Now I'm considering to apply to NC's online degree programs of public health, and change my career path. | of the course for the first | Time | since I started Coursera. Now I'm | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I enjoyed hearing about epidemiology, but didn't find the quizzes very useful. I was expecting more practice doing computation or examining case studies. The lectures also had no time in between slides to pause, write notes, and make sure I understood what was just said. I liked that the lectures were well organized and the review questions in between the topics of discussion. | studies. The lectures also had no | Time | in between slides to pause, write | Negative | 0.86 | 3.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | and wish there had been more | Time | spent on that and more quiz | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | quiz I had to take multiple | Time | and really couldn't figure out what | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Fun introduction (I have no background at all in Epidemiology or related fields). However, the material is quite basic, and therefore not very challenging. Still worth the time if you want to get a good idea of what epidemiology is. | not very challenging. Still worth the | Time | if you want to get a | Negative | 0.74 | 3.0 |
| fjjF0gVfEeW0KyIACxqWIg | Contains a lot of information for the short course time, but well worth taking even if you can't complete all of the work. It applies a lot of music theory, so consider it the hands-on practice for all of those theory lectures you might have taken. | of information for the short course | Time | but well worth taking even if | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| fjjF0gVfEeW0KyIACxqWIg | This is an excellent course and it really pushes you hard to learn Classical Composition. There are a few problems, however. Minor quibbles: 1) The instructor does not really explain Parallel Perfect Fifths or Octaves; I had to look them up on my own. They deserve a whole lecture. 2) One of the assignment solutions has a Parallel Octave by contrary motion, which is not supposed to be allowed. 3) He also neglected to explain the Harmonic Minor Key being used for minor chords in his Lecture 0 of Week 2. Just a very short explanation would have saved me 40 minutes of stressful researching, confusion, and doubts about my own sanity ;) The biggest problem: This course should really be an 8- or 12-week course. The weeks are very densely packed. In Week 2, I worked 3-4 hours every day, and then was greeted by 11 classes due in 7 days when I opened Week 3. The assignments are rated 10 or 20 minutes but actually take about 2 hours. It would often take me thirty minutes to an hour to get through one 5-15 minute video. (I do take detailed notes and do recall and mnemonic drills along the way, however). If you are already solidly grounded in music theory and have much of voice leading on autopilot, this class is faster. That said, I would not want him to cut out anything. Every class so far has been necessary. It has taken me from almost 0 musical theory understanding to feeling very comfortable with advanced concepts, all in an extremely short time. If you try to complete all of his video examples just before he does them, they work like a charm. I came here to get solid skills, and Just three weeks in I feel like I have made a years' worth of progress. I highly recommend this course, but know the kind of work you are getting into. | concepts, all in an extremely short | Time | If you try to complete all | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| fjjF0gVfEeW0KyIACxqWIg | I had no time to actually do the course material properly (due to real-life work) but I loved following what I could and eventually will take the course properly (next year). There is a lot of material covered and can be challenging for someone with little knowledge of music theory, but with some extra baxkground reading (and some wikipedia articles) one can catch up quickly. Highly recommended. | I had no | Time | to actually do the course material | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Very nice work on the various fields of Linguistics, high level interviews, but rather laborious and time consuming quizzes. | level interviews, but rather laborious and | Time | consuming quizzes. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | It was very interesting and you get to understand a lot about Linguistics, considering the amount of time it requires. It also makes the most of the platform, so it's really well made. | about Linguistics, considering the amount of | Time | it requires. It also makes the | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | "Miracles of Human Language" is a great introductory course for those who want to get into linguistics, but it is also an amazing course for writers, teachers, psychologists and all lifelong learners interested in a topic. I'm very grateful to Prof. Dr Marc van Oostendorp, his students and everyone who was involved in creating this course. I also want to say thanks to coursera team for making this course available for so many learners. This course inspired me to start learning Spanish and French (I now spend some time on duolingo.com every day, and with a great pleasure). Also, after finishing this course, I felt confident enough to start an important writing project (a book for children with a goal to prevent child abuse, the book is in Russian). In this course the idea of changing the world with your words is presented in such a simple and convincing way, that it's impossible to resist. I think this course made me a better teacher, a better writer and a happier person. | and French (I now spend some | Time | on duolingo. com every day, and | Negative | 0.72 | 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. | would not recommend anyone to spend | Time | on learning this course. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Thank you! Feels like going back in time - back to my student's years. | you! Feels like going back in | Time | - back to my student's years. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course itself is fine. The quizzes, however, are so frustrating as to lower the enjoyment of the whole thing. Numerous answers are just factually wrong. You end up retaking the quiz time and again and then selecting random answers just to pass. | You end up retaking the quiz | Time | and again and then selecting random | Negative | 0.68 | 2.0 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Excellent course, this is my third time taking this course. I really enjoyed it pretty much. Have fun. ;) | Excellent course, this is my third | Time | taking this course. I really enjoyed | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | made watching the videos frustrating at | Time | I'm not sure which kind of | Negative | 0.84 | 2.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It's a lot of information in very little time. I don't believe it's impossible to do it, I just mean that maybe little less info may help us get a more solid idea of what we are actually doing, instead of just trying to copy what we've seen. Just an idea. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. | lot of information in very little | Time | I don't believe it's impossible to | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Nice course, well structured and whit a challenging final test even if it not so easy this time, for a person like me, whithout precedent programming skills. | if it not so easy this | Time | for a person like me, whithout | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Its nice .But i don't have time for Assignment work .i feel good on templates. | nice . But i don't have | Time | for Assignment work . i feel | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course, I've learned a lot. I went from knowing little to know a lot!!. However the time I spent in the assignments is not exactly what was expected, I took probably 10 times more tan the expected time since the level of the last two weeks gets really high and lots of info is missing in order to complete assignments. Hope you improve this next time. | a lot! ! . However the | Time | I spent in the assignments is | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course, I've learned a lot. I went from knowing little to know a lot!!. However the time I spent in the assignments is not exactly what was expected, I took probably 10 times more tan the expected time since the level of the last two weeks gets really high and lots of info is missing in order to complete assignments. Hope you improve this next time. | was expected, I took probably 10 | Time | more tan the expected time since | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course, I've learned a lot. I went from knowing little to know a lot!!. However the time I spent in the assignments is not exactly what was expected, I took probably 10 times more tan the expected time since the level of the last two weeks gets really high and lots of info is missing in order to complete assignments. Hope you improve this next time. | 10 times more tan the expected | Time | since the level of the last | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course, I've learned a lot. I went from knowing little to know a lot!!. However the time I spent in the assignments is not exactly what was expected, I took probably 10 times more tan the expected time since the level of the last two weeks gets really high and lots of info is missing in order to complete assignments. Hope you improve this next time. | assignments. Hope you improve this next | Time | | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A course that picks up well from the previous one in the specialization. Difficulty level increases marginally, yet remains perfectly accessible for beginners and intermediate learners. You will need to invest more time towards the last 2 weeks of the course as compared to the initial 2 weeks. | You will need to invest more | Time | towards the last 2 weeks of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I have learn a lot, definitely worthed mine time. | learn a lot, definitely worthed mine | Time | | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very nice course with solid foundation and great examples. One recommendation would be to split the material on Week 4 into 2 weeks: Week 4 and Week 5. The teachers would have more time for explaining every bit in the lectures so the difficulty would step up evenly between weeks. Other than the amount of material on last week, it is a good course and highly recommended! | 5. The teachers would have more | Time | for explaining every bit in the | Negative | 0.62 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I did learn some new things, but there were times that I wasn't sure about the focus of the course: some of the questions are on the spectrum of too tricky-unclear, there were too many "find my error in the code" issues. Plus, the last project (gallery) - which has many good features and ideas, does not seem completely finished from a UX point of view. | some new things, but there were | Time | that I wasn't sure about the | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course, packed a lot into a short time frame. | packed a lot into a short | Time | frame. | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | difficult at times - particularly wrestling with Handlebars the template library- but well worth the time devoted to understanding and using what is taught here. | difficult at | Time | - particularly wrestling with Handlebars the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | difficult at times - particularly wrestling with Handlebars the template library- but well worth the time devoted to understanding and using what is taught here. | template library- but well worth the | Time | devoted to understanding and using what | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Simply great, I've learned Handlebars, a great tool to make my life easier programming instead of the use of jQuery all the time to fill DOM elements. It remains a little less difficult and probably a little more extension to cover all the details for beginner programmers people. | the use of jQuery all the | Time | to fill DOM elements. It remains | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| Fp0K8RoEEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Outstanding class, great approach to covering the topics. Maybe a bit more time on the new method of doing the slideshow though? It's a bit overly complex. | the topics. Maybe a bit more | Time | on the new method of doing | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | Nice introductory course. I thought Prof Balch was a interesting and engaging prof. The assignments were well thought out. Here are some tips: I would not recommend this course without a grasp of python. The more Python you know, the easier it will be. Next, and more importantly, spend time learning Pandas. Pandas is extraordinary, for timeseries data. You will save a tremendous amount of time as you get deeper into this subject if you have a grasp on Pandas. Read the professors text. It is compact and to the point. Expect that you will get more out of this course the harder you work. So, try your own experiments, read the recommended texts. Think of Prof Balch as more of a tour guide and it is up to you to go explore on your own. | be. Next, and more importantly, spend | Time | learning Pandas. Pandas is extraordinary, for | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | Nice introductory course. I thought Prof Balch was a interesting and engaging prof. The assignments were well thought out. Here are some tips: I would not recommend this course without a grasp of python. The more Python you know, the easier it will be. Next, and more importantly, spend time learning Pandas. Pandas is extraordinary, for timeseries data. You will save a tremendous amount of time as you get deeper into this subject if you have a grasp on Pandas. Read the professors text. It is compact and to the point. Expect that you will get more out of this course the harder you work. So, try your own experiments, read the recommended texts. Think of Prof Balch as more of a tour guide and it is up to you to go explore on your own. | will save a tremendous amount of | Time | as you get deeper into this | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | I like Mr Balch but to be honest I learned next to nothing. Maybe this is a good course for somebody who has no background in finance. As for myself I felt that I was wasting time and money. The book associated with this course was just like the course itself: shallow and doesn't go in any depth to explain the matter fully and rigorously. If you want to know WHAT computational investing is, you can take this class. Googling a bit will have roughly the same effect, though. If you want to learn how to actually DO computational investing, do not take this course - its just not serious enough. As the name of this course implies, you probably expected to find part II somewhere, which was promised to be a course about using machine learning in investing. 3 or 4 years after part I went live, part II is still missing and probably will never come out. The software used in this course, QSTK, is buggy and has been so for 3+ years. Its not maintained by anyone, and the people taking this course had to find ways to overcome QSTK bugs to be able to complete their assignments. And lastly: the exercises. There are none. All you get is a lame quiz for every week which basically asks to change some variables in the scripts provided. I did some coding for week 3 but that was it. No coding practice after that. | I felt that I was wasting | Time | and money. The book associated with | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | The code teacher used is out of maintenance, students have to spend a lot of unnecessary time fix it. Even I have purchase it and finished week 1-3, I still chose to drop out. Not great learning experience. :( | to spend a lot of unnecessary | Time | fix it. Even I have purchase | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | course is pretty good and everything is very simply explained but i gave 4 stars only because many things was repeated so many times that it was sometimes soo boring and i thought we will compute in python more. | many things was repeated so many | Time | that it was sometimes soo boring | Negative | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | I enjoyed this course. The content was good and the assignments challenging. The presenter was OK but he seemed a little unprepared at times. I think the course is a little dated in that the strategies taught simply don't work anymore, but as an introduction to some techniques and considerations for technical analysis then I recommend it. I also recommend that anyone considering this course without a strong python background takes some time to learn how to use Pandas - it will make your life much easier! | he seemed a little unprepared at | Time | I think the course is a | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | I enjoyed this course. The content was good and the assignments challenging. The presenter was OK but he seemed a little unprepared at times. I think the course is a little dated in that the strategies taught simply don't work anymore, but as an introduction to some techniques and considerations for technical analysis then I recommend it. I also recommend that anyone considering this course without a strong python background takes some time to learn how to use Pandas - it will make your life much easier! | a strong python background takes some | Time | to learn how to use Pandas | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| fTnuinwaEeS7SCIACxCljA | GOOD: topics BAD: presentation (poor sound, unprepared and unrehearsed presentations, long intro's, unjustified use of greenscrenns, etc) shallow with regards to the theoretical aspects of what it is presented assignments are mechanical (easier than the tutorial and you have to perform the same tasks for different constants for several times) | tasks for different constants for several | Time | | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 |
| Fw4ZgaAIEeSrPCIAC1SWlw | Excellent explanation of all concepts with real time machine application. The course is organised systematically to understand the concepts sequentially. | explanation of all concepts with real | Time | machine application. The course is organised | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| fZN4SVfiEeWsGQ6fKrurvQ | Since this course handles difficult context, it may be little bit hard to one who studies law first time. | to one who studies law first | Time | | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| fZN4SVfiEeWsGQ6fKrurvQ | I enjoyed this course but you really need to have some legal background to get the most out of it. The assignments were worth the time they took and I learned a lot trying to grade my fellow students. | it. The assignments were worth the | Time | they took and I learned a | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| g4FwNDVyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I completely endorse the course. It definitely has given me an edge on how I conduct my assessments and when is the good time. Moreover I have had a lot of new learning take place in my career. Regards, Phillip | assessments and when is the good | Time | Moreover I have had a lot | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| g4FwNDVyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course presents a clear structure and an interesting approach, including materials on the assessment of minorities. Furthermore, it is well supported in scientific evidence as multimedia materials that help to understand the concepts addressed in the course. However, the materials are someway monotone, the subject is addressed in general terms, which is understandable given the time set for the course, but it may had been better by focusing on concepts instead of examples. | terms, which is understandable given the | Time | set for the course, but it | Positive | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Horrific. If I could rate this ZERO I would. The instructor will give you a one sentence explanation and definition for a term (literally, I downloaded the transcripts to help with my notes and assignments) and then say, "Now that we learned x..." and fly right into the next term. Worse, many of the sentences don't even make sense and completely incoherrant, even in the written transcript. I am having to go out and find additional textbooks to research the basic definitions of what is required to pass the course. There is even less explanation of real-world applications, examples, and demonstration. It is almost as though she tried to memorize a sheet of definitions and repeated them without the use of her notes. This results in a highly monotonous monologue with awkward gestures and little actual content. I was planning on going for the PR for Digital Media Certification, but I can't handle another course like this. It's a waste of time and money. | like this. It's a waste of | Time | and money. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I am sorry, but this course is made by PR specialist, people that should know how to talk to the public. Some teachers of this specialisation should been trained on how to behave in front of a camera. The content is nice but you repeat too many time the same stuff, in a very neutral voice, so it is really hard to keep watching the course. Thanks for sharing your knowledge, it is really helpful and rich, but as communication specialist, you can't just read a text, you have to live it. The source is important when releasing a message ! that's what you said ! The source should a good CV, but also has to know how to present the message. | nice but you repeat too many | Time | the same stuff, in a very | Positive | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I learned valuable concepts on PR research in this course. I have my own b business in marketing and business services, and still I have new findings. The lecturer uses minimal time to give maximum knowledge, so be prepared to stop the video from time to time to take note and google the exact definition. IMHO this is the way I keep on track and not get lost. Research is not fun, research is to take abstract traces and make them concrete. | new findings. The lecturer uses minimal | Time | to give maximum knowledge, so be | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I learned valuable concepts on PR research in this course. I have my own b business in marketing and business services, and still I have new findings. The lecturer uses minimal time to give maximum knowledge, so be prepared to stop the video from time to time to take note and google the exact definition. IMHO this is the way I keep on track and not get lost. Research is not fun, research is to take abstract traces and make them concrete. | prepared to stop the video from | Time | to time to take note and | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I learned valuable concepts on PR research in this course. I have my own b business in marketing and business services, and still I have new findings. The lecturer uses minimal time to give maximum knowledge, so be prepared to stop the video from time to time to take note and google the exact definition. IMHO this is the way I keep on track and not get lost. Research is not fun, research is to take abstract traces and make them concrete. | stop the video from time to | Time | to take note and google the | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| G6m5MzTeEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | excellent teaching, wonderful course, very simple and does not take time to understand | very simple and does not take | Time | to understand | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | An AMAZING course for beginners. As a highschooler not pursuing biology in school this was still pretty easy to understand and enjoy (the reason I started it). Highly recommended for people wanting a light introductory course to genetics and a bit of evolution and those who can't take out too much time for doing an intense course. | who can't take out too much | Time | for doing an intense course. | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | Provocative and engaging review of topics in human genetics. Requires some basic familiarity with biological principles. But well worth a personal investment in time and effort. Both lecturers are fascinating. Only recommendation for improvement would be to present sources cited in the videos elsewhere in the course materials. They roll by so quickly at the end of the video segments that it was impossible to review them adequately. Great course. | well worth a personal investment in | Time | and effort. Both lecturers are fascinating. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | The best course I had on coursera. It is a comprehensive overview of current biotechnological techniquess and their established and potential results. The course keeps a shrewd balance between giving scientific information and looking at the broader more complex implications for society. You might think at times that the professor is not a scientist but a philosopher as well. The course is taught superbly by both professor and assistant, not one extra word, and not one word missing given the choice of topics. I think most of what is taught here should ideally be known by the majority of all people, in order to make more informed and thoughtful choices about life, as well as understanding what will happen in the next decades. | for society. You might think at | Time | that the professor is not a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | Not perfect because in the video, multiple times the lecturer mentioned external information or links that didn't exist. No additional information was provided | perfect because in the video, multiple | Time | the lecturer mentioned external information or | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | This course did an exceptional job of providing a lay audience with a broad overview of human genetics, evolution, behavior, and associated technologies. The lecturers were engaging and have an impressively varied range of knowledge. This course lays an exceptional foundation for exploring a variety of in-depth topics covered with a more narrow focus elsewhere on Coursera (e.g., molecular biology, evolution, human behavior, neuroscience, &c). Tammatha O'Brien’s initial lectures did a particularly good job of introducing basic genetics with accessible metaphors, without allowing those metaphors to be overextended. She was also careful to flag the caveats and exceptions where appropriate to ensure students didn’t walk away with an oversimplified narrative of molecular biology (a challenge I’ve seen in other introductory courses). Raymond St. Leger’s passion is clear, and makes his lecturers particularly captivating. For the most part, he did a good job of flagging areas where results were preliminary (e.g., based on a single study) or speculative (e.g., based on his interpretation of the research). Nonetheless, there were some areas where it was unclear if he was presenting a well-established scientific consensus, or his own (well-informed) conjecture. In these scenarios, it would be useful to provide a more comprehensive bibliography for students interested in diving deeper into the research. As an aspiring science communicator involved in addressing public concerns over GMOs, I was particularly pleased to not only see biotechnology covered, but also to have it effectively dispel many of the common criticisms. I’ve generally found that once a basic understanding of genetics and evolution is established, it’s a short leap to disarm most of the fears; nonetheless, I’ve now taken five genetics courses that have steered clear of even acknowledging either GMOs or their controversy. Thank you for addressing these head on. Thank you for taking the time to put this course together and sharing it with the public via Coursera. The effort is recognized, and much appreciated. | on. Thank you for taking the | Time | to put this course together and | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | Thank you to Dr. O'Brien and Dr. St. Leger for an excellent course: solid information delivered clearly and intelligently. As the course moved along I found myself binge-watching! I must have finished all 7 weeks in record time-- like a good book, I could not put it down. This was an outstanding educational experience. | finished all 7 weeks in record | Time | like a good book, I could | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| gbsG0MYYEeSsuSIAC8uEUA | good course a bit hard to understand at times the information can get confusing but the it is there wish they would add printable bulletins at the end so make information readable just for extra help with the understanding of the material | a bit hard to understand at | Time | the information can get confusing but | Positive | 0.7 | 3.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Awesome...the concepts have been explained in a superb way, the contents are itself high class, he example computations are jist wonderful. Although I am yet to finish it, I am just enthralled with it and have been a fan of coursera big time!! Expecting more detailed and rigorous course on financial engg which can be a testimony itself for an entry to the industry!! | been a fan of coursera big | Time | ! Expecting more detailed and rigorous | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Good course. Personally I think it is almost the perfect level for those who have some basic understandings about finance and look forward to go deep(such as me). This course requires some understanding about using Excel, which is quite useful when doing the quiz. Mastering Excel well would save a lot time. Some material might be a little hard but with patience and hardworking, it can still be solved. Highly recommended! | Excel well would save a lot | Time | Some material might be a little | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | This course is a great, from the perspective of how it is organized as well as the assignments provided at the end of each module. The way the content layout is well-suited and leads student step by step gaining insight to the mechanics of different financial derivatives and working on those assignments is a great method of pushing student spend time to understand how the mechanics works. Both instructors are great! and I appreciated greatly their effort as well as Coursera. The only one improvement I would suggest is that if a TA can be assigned for this course, it'll be a great help to all students. Thanks! | great method of pushing student spend | Time | to understand how the mechanics works. | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | GOOD place to start THe arduino intro is good but little short on c but its only 4 weeks not enough for me to grasp right off the bat anyway so i back off to next session then catch up more C then finish its only a couple short c videos then your asked to write programs with little or no knowledge basicly 3- 7 min lectures on the language EASY TO BE KINDA LOST AT FIRST IM 60 yrs old not twenty !!! From what im reading online LIBRARIES ARE TOTALLY LIMITED ON ARDUINOS IDE nd ITS NOT REALLY C its ARDUINO C because a lot of the workings of the arduino ide are easier for new people alot of the inner workings are hidden tough to learn the inner workings unlike a full featured IDE GOOD Platform to start on AFTER BASICS HERE with tidbits Id rather go later to C++ and spend the time there then get on better platform ARM PIC boards with real ides and REAL C + something you can use in the real world for bigger programs and I can see staying here at arduino too long and not going on to other platforms could cause bad programing habits to start with writing limited code just seems more productive after you get your electronics down coding and some hardwhare experience to go right to the real deal Pic arm or any of the other boards with a MUCH steeper learning curve GREAT to Figure out and learn electronics get some hardwhare experience here of course on ARDUINO and from what im seeing from some pros Even if there on more advanced platforms that run bigger faster programs dont have the bootloader many pros use arduino for a first layout to test circuits here first GOOD COURSE gets you DIGGING AND THINKING This is where to start you certainly cant start on advanced platforms right off its really almost impossible without a lot more skill to obtain first | later to C++ and spend the | Time | there then get on better platform | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | Linking programming language to hardware sucks. Do not waste time on this course. | to hardware sucks. Do not waste | Time | on this course. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | This is a good course, especially for beginners as one can learn the basics without spending too much time or getting confused by too many technical terms. | the basics without spending too much | Time | or getting confused by too many | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | Very clever explanations. I am really getting a nice time whit this mooc! | I am really getting a nice | Time | whit this mooc! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | Although most information in the course can be easily obtained via the internet, the packaging of the right content in the form of video lectures accelerates the learning process ten-fold! One can get started within the hour with Arduino programming without reading a single article on the web! Great course. One suggestion for improvement is to spend more time on the discussion library functions that are relevant to the IoT technology. | for improvement is to spend more | Time | on the discussion library functions that | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | A nice introduction to C programming, which could seem intimidating to non programmers at first, but this course keeps a fresh and clear perspective and you'll learn the most useful coding structures and functions to start experimenting with arduino in no time. | start experimenting with arduino in no | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | As I was taking this class, I often wondered who the target audience was. Although the class has no listed prerequisites, I noticed a lot of engineering jargon being used without ever defining what it meant. I'm not sure that non-technical people would get much out of the lectures. On the other hand, the lectures were mostly at a superficial level, so I'm not sure that technical people would get much out of them either. The only topic that got a (somewhat) deep dive was serial communication, and it wasn't clear why; users of the Arduino don't need to understand it any more or less than any other aspect of how an Arduino works.There were other issues. The programs we wrote had to be pasted into a submission form that removed all the carriage returns when you hit Save; I had to manually fix my program each time. Perhaps most frustratingly, you could follow the assignment instructions to the letter, but after you submitted you might find out that the grading criteria included other requirements. In one case people asked about it, and it turned out that the grading criteria were wrong, but they were never updated. My sense was that not much effort went into the creation of this course. | to manually fix my program each | Time | Perhaps most frustratingly, you could follow | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| gh5rVEd3EeW2ZBIIl17oPw | This course is too short and have little real time example . | too short and have little real | Time | example . | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| GixeETxVEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | I'm a new horse owner. I've taken this course multiple times. It is the BEST introduction to being a responsible horse owner that I have found. I can't say enough good things. Even the content that didn't apply to my situation | owner. I've taken this course multiple | Time | It is the BEST introduction to | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| GixeETxVEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | I love this course a lot. It helps me so much with everything from the basics of horse care and management to equine nutrition. I am thinking of being a vet, so this course is really helping me. I have also taken the Equine Nutrition course from the University of Edinburgh, and that course really helped me, too. Thank you for taking lot's of time to make this course and to help horse owners with their horses. | Thank you for taking lot's of | Time | to make this course and to | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| GMSg0yWsEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The course had some useful content, but there was too much time spent on USA centred materials for an iavailabe course. | content, but there was too much | Time | spent on USA centred materials for | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| gmsPUNGEEeSHqyIAC1AQBw | This is the rating for the whole specialization. 1) Some course are nice and well done, but probably only 2-3 of the 9 (The entrepreneur one is really well done). But most of them are simply useless. 2) It's too long. For the same amount of knowledge, I could have done just 3 WELL DONE courses. 3) Most of courses are just things people read in front of a screen, without any passion or interest. And the concept are so easy I am wandering if they need to be teached at all. 4) The exam are just sloppy. Even a monkey that didn't watch the video could answer them (sometimes I try to do the same and it works. If I already know what you will ask me, which kind of knowledge are you supposed to teach me?), 5) About this project, the instructions are messed up. In the end, I finish it because it was my first specialization, and I was lucky enough to do the interesting one at the beginning, so I feel compelled to end it, but really, I am not sure It was worth my time. | not sure It was worth my | Time | | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| goJ9vXd_EeWtpg5GoAM5Iw | Thank you for sharing the Course. The course provides clear guidance and always reminding how important it is to be an ethical journalist. With the assignments for each lesson at each week push us to be more creative in ideas of preparing and planning news and types of resources. Appreciate, and hoping that Coursera will always be there for us who look forward to update and learn knowledge that can help us in compete with the current always changing world, the same time as Coursera will keep on updating and considering on the comments/reviews from your Learners. Would be great if the courses presented could be totally affordable and free for all :) | current always changing world, the same | Time | as Coursera will keep on updating | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | Hi..Greetings!!! This course provides a wide range of detailed insights regarding Municipal Solid Waste Management. The presentation of lecturers is highly admirable. Every time you finish one chapter, it will render you being thoughtful and inspired.. Regards | of lecturers is highly admirable. Every | Time | you finish one chapter, it will | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | Very informative and educational course!! Lectures and notes are well organized. Reasonable amount of time is required every week for lectures. It will expand your mind and will help you think critically on how to alleviate this very critical problem of waste management. | are well organized. Reasonable amount of | Time | is required every week for lectures. | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | Its an excellent course with just the right amount of detailing required to develop a decent understanding of the options, costs, advantages and disadvantages. It leaves one confident to be able to plan SWM for small scale projects such group housings or institutional buildings, where current laws require 100% treatment of organic waste at site. I found nearly 60-70% of the material as new for me and I have studied SWM as a subject during my final year of engineering in 1998-99. The case studies were interesting and enlightening. I feel updated. I am glad I managed to go through entire coursework despite the fact I was traveling for 3 weeks and no internet access. Hence, the flexibility of deadlines also supported students like me who do what they can, as time permits. | who do what they can, as | Time | permits. | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| gpAI9GK4EeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | The lectures were insightful and concise. A few topics were a bit too technical like the one on Thermo Chemical Conversion. May be more time could have been dedicated to governance issues and strategic planning for SWM. | Thermo Chemical Conversion. May be more | Time | could have been dedicated to governance | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The actual amount of time required per week to complete the course was well over the 3-5 hours/week advertised on the course homepage. It was a very time intensive activity each week- especially the last 2 weeks. | The actual amount of | Time | required per week to complete the | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The actual amount of time required per week to complete the course was well over the 3-5 hours/week advertised on the course homepage. It was a very time intensive activity each week- especially the last 2 weeks. | course homepage. It was a very | Time | intensive activity each week- especially the | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is by far the most comprehensive SQL course I have ever taken. A lot of times there are SQL classes that are online that give you a glimpse into what it takes to be great at SQL queries. This is a must for anyone seriously considering to becoming a data analyst. | have ever taken. A lot of | Time | there are SQL classes that are | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course should be longer, prepare yourself you are going to need a lot of time, unless you have previous experience from SQL. It'll take maybe even more than one session. But it is worth it, because it covers all skills you need for working with SQL. If you really need to learn SQL, there is no better option. | going to need a lot of | Time | unless you have previous experience from | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It's pretty good for entry-level SQL learners. However, to further improve, much time is required. Also, exercises provided are sometimes really weird. | learners. However, to further improve, much | Time | is required. Also, exercises provided are | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I found the first 4 weeks of the course amazing: just really well structured, thought-out, and delivered in a way that positions the student for success. Jana breaks the material down into digestible bits, gives you sufficient practice, and even if you don't get it, you can look at the answers to the practice questions and figure out where your thinking was incorrect. The 5th week wasn't as well broken down, especially the last set of Teradata exercises. New concepts or ways of structuring queries were being introduced in those exercises, but there was no way to check for a correct solution if I couldn't come with one on my own (which was unfortunately half of the time). I still got a good grade on my last quiz, but I can't say that I really truly learned how to write the more complicated queries. I would suggest that the last Teradata exercise set has more explanation or perhaps just answers that the student can refer to in order to understand why his/her line of thinking isn't working. Otherwise, a truly fantastic course. I 100% recommend it. | (which was unfortunately half of the | Time | I still got a good grade | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | One of the best MOOC courses out there! Challenging but you will learn a lot if you stick with it. Extensive and in-depth lectures/practice exercises on SQL. Appreciate that you learn using two systems, MySQL (through Jupyter) and Teradata. However the Teradata interface is a bit clunky and takes time getting used to. BTW, Jana is a great instructor and Duke courses, in this track, especially the Tableau and MySQL courses are the best out there at the moment. | is a bit clunky and takes | Time | getting used to. BTW, Jana is | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good material but heavy work-load, especially since we are learning two new skills -SQL syntax and Data analysis. Request instructors/TA's to guide students more in the forums. Analysis like computing avg daily revenue should be explained better as I spent too much time figuring it out and the forum answers were way off. However, this being an online class I was very impressed with the detailed worksheets in MYSQL. | better as I spent too much | Time | figuring it out and the forum | Negative | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course should be divided in 2 o be longer for two main reasons: 1) Weeks are way too long to cover all the material, plus the research you need to do outside the platform. The time required end up being too much. 2) The course is not deep enough - There's just too much topic to cover, and because of time constrains there are a lot of holes in your education at the end. For this two reason is better con get 2 courses about this topic. That way you can go deeper in to the SQL explanation, and can get at thee same time a better understanding of each topic, instead of getting a lot of thing to cope in just one week. | to do outside the platform. The | Time | required end up being too much. | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course should be divided in 2 o be longer for two main reasons: 1) Weeks are way too long to cover all the material, plus the research you need to do outside the platform. The time required end up being too much. 2) The course is not deep enough - There's just too much topic to cover, and because of time constrains there are a lot of holes in your education at the end. For this two reason is better con get 2 courses about this topic. That way you can go deeper in to the SQL explanation, and can get at thee same time a better understanding of each topic, instead of getting a lot of thing to cope in just one week. | topic to cover, and because of | Time | constrains there are a lot of | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course should be divided in 2 o be longer for two main reasons: 1) Weeks are way too long to cover all the material, plus the research you need to do outside the platform. The time required end up being too much. 2) The course is not deep enough - There's just too much topic to cover, and because of time constrains there are a lot of holes in your education at the end. For this two reason is better con get 2 courses about this topic. That way you can go deeper in to the SQL explanation, and can get at thee same time a better understanding of each topic, instead of getting a lot of thing to cope in just one week. | and can get at thee same | Time | a better understanding of each topic, | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I really learned a lot! But it's hard and requires huge amount of time to master. | hard and requires huge amount of | Time | to master. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| gt5ybBU-EeWhTg59fTWfpQ | I really liked the videos with Dan and Norman. Great to hear from real people what we read on the books, some times it feels unreal, but when you see a real person telling you something is more credible. | we read on the books, some | Time | it feels unreal, but when you | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| gtbTilrcEeW5ChKOjFc59Q | A course with a very good level of detail regarding every important aspect of the topic (considering the amount of time required); information presented in a clear way. | the topic (considering the amount of | Time | required); information presented in a clear | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| gttJnUtZEeW4rRLEP0z9Bw | As a seasoned teacher, 20 years, much of this content is intuitive or has already been in place in my classroom. The course validated much of the methodology I already use, but I did lose interest from time to time. | but I did lose interest from | Time | to time. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| gttJnUtZEeW4rRLEP0z9Bw | As a seasoned teacher, 20 years, much of this content is intuitive or has already been in place in my classroom. The course validated much of the methodology I already use, but I did lose interest from time to time. | did lose interest from time to | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Prof. Ng is very engaging and his explanations are crystal clear, even when dealing with complex topics. I would also like to thank the assistants that wrote the Matlab/Octave homework assignments: it shows that a lot of time and attention has been put into them and I thoroughly enjoyed doing my homework, which wasn't easy! I also found the Errata quite helpful. Thanks to all! | it shows that a lot of | Time | and attention has been put into | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really like this course, specially the way Prof. Andrew Ng explains mathematical intuitions behind algorithms and concepts. I have done many courses in maths including linear algebra, statistical analysis ,signal processing etc, but never seen any professor explaining mathematical aspect behind algorithms, concepts in simpler way. I really like to thank Prof. Andrew for teaching this course so that people like me understands some of the concepts which were confusing to understand in past. After finishing this course, I feel confident in not only in applying algorithm in application but also to improve algorithm performance. Once again, I really like to thank people who made this course possible. Thanks for you very much Prof Andrew for devoting your precious time to teach this course to students like us. | Prof Andrew for devoting your precious | Time | to teach this course to students | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course was well organized. xamples and assignments helped my understanding. I was able to learn what I needed for much less time than I expected! | what I needed for much less | Time | than I expected! | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is by far the best online learning course. I learned so much from Prof Andrew Ng. I really appreciate it. Could have been better if we wrote all the codes from scratch but that would have taken longer time. Much informative. Next is to learn python and the sckit-learn libraries. I prefer Octave and MAtlab because you actually see and understand the algorithm and the basics of it. its not widely used though but very powerful. Thanks again. | but that would have taken longer | Time | Much informative. Next is to learn | Negative | 0.73 | 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 | be helpful but most of the | Time | it's not an issue if you | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is an amazing in-depth course. Worth every minute of my time. Its an honor to learn from the expert in this field. Thank you! | course. Worth every minute of my | Time | Its an honor to learn from | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course! Easy to follow, useful, and very practical. At the same time, if you want to understand deeper why things work the way they do and/or the math behind it, the lectures give you good directions to look further into it. The programming assignments are a bit on the basic side (in terms of what you have to do vs what they give you), but are still great to put these ideas into a practical setting, and the optional parts help you explore the applications in more depth. Really glad I put the time into it. Totally worth it. | and very practical. At the same | Time | if you want to understand deeper | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course! Easy to follow, useful, and very practical. At the same time, if you want to understand deeper why things work the way they do and/or the math behind it, the lectures give you good directions to look further into it. The programming assignments are a bit on the basic side (in terms of what you have to do vs what they give you), but are still great to put these ideas into a practical setting, and the optional parts help you explore the applications in more depth. Really glad I put the time into it. Totally worth it. | depth. Really glad I put the | Time | into it. Totally worth it. | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Just completed the course myself and I have to say this is a great course for anyone who wants to get a comprehensive understanding of Machine Learning. First of all, the content of the course is very well structured. It covers a lot of machine learning algorithms and also includes a lot of practical applications. Professor Ng is very gifted in teaching and he can explain some difficult topics in very simple terms. I also found he is very engaging and the quick questions inserted in the middle of the videos are very helpful to keep the students focused on the lecture. The programming assignments are at the right level of difficulty, and I found the instruction for each assignment works like a great summary of the corresponding materials. Didn't use their discussion forum much, but for a couple times I used, the mentor was able to respond in a very timely manner. Overall, this is a great course and I am so happy to be able to take it myself. Thank you, Professor Ng! | forum much, but for a couple | Time | I used, the mentor was able | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | You can really learn a lot from taking this course. Professor Ng must have spent a huge amount of time, effort and thinking in preparing this class. Just follow the course schedule, and you will be lead into a new world. | have spent a huge amount of | Time | effort and thinking in preparing this | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course is absolutely needed for anyone who wants to start a career in ML. There are few areas of improvement but that could be my way of interpretation. SO I suggest people who wants to start their career in ML or who wants to break the jargon of ML to spend time and do this course. There is no better course than this. | the jargon of ML to spend | Time | and do this course. There is | Negative | 0.78 | 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, | anytime soon or at least on | Time | before the next session because of | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is very friendly to new learners of machine learning. The teacher is a famous scholar in this field, and his explanation is full and accurate. Besides, he will also give warnings about details occasionally, so that when you are actually working on a project, you will not wasting time doing useless thing. And the programming exercise is brilliant, not very hard, but requiring some time for new learners. I think I have benefit a lot from this course. | a project, you will not wasting | Time | doing useless thing. And the programming | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is very friendly to new learners of machine learning. The teacher is a famous scholar in this field, and his explanation is full and accurate. Besides, he will also give warnings about details occasionally, so that when you are actually working on a project, you will not wasting time doing useless thing. And the programming exercise is brilliant, not very hard, but requiring some time for new learners. I think I have benefit a lot from this course. | not very hard, but requiring some | Time | for new learners. I think I | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is, strictly speaking, my first class in ML. And I squeeze a large amount of time to finish this class and learn a lot. I really really strongly recommend you to enroll this. | I squeeze a large amount of | Time | to finish this class and learn | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Apparently, Andrew Ng is determined to downgrade the handicap score of this course to make it more available to a larger audience, some times at expense of rigorousness. I agree with most of the concessions, except the assumption that even calculus is not strictly pre-required. On the contrary, I believe that calculus, matrix, and probabilisitic thinking should be required for modern engineer to be qualified to work on big-data. Or, we might have conceded too much of the battleground. | available to a larger audience, some | Time | at expense of rigorousness. I agree | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | If you have time, if you like Algorithmic, if you are looking for new skills, GOOOO!! | If you have | Time | if you like Algorithmic, if you | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Prof. Ng is very knowledgeable and explains each topic concisely and informatively. He does not assume that students have a lot of backgrounds in linear algebra or programming. He takes time to explain everything we need to know step by step and from the very basic. I really appreciate his effort in teaching this class and make it accessible to anyone. Also thanks to all mentors, tas, and other students who participated in the discussion forum and provided useful resources on completing the assignments. | linear algebra or programming. He takes | Time | to explain everything we need to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Despite of the course is free of cost, Prof Andrew Ng teaches it as best as it can be taught to a newly beginner (like me), who does not know anything about machine learning (how have to know at-least basic to intermediate maths concepts). The explanation of complex mathematical algorithms and concepts are made very simple and interesting... I hope this turns out to be beneficial and practically useful for me as i progress thought the course. *At the time of writing this review i am currently going to start week 4, | progress thought the course. *At the | Time | of writing this review i am | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is an amazing course to get a deep knowledge about Machine learning and its various algorithms and applications. This course doesn't only teach us how to use these algorithms, but also how to use them efficiently and correctly. It also teaches us ways to improve the performance of these algorithms and warns us about potential mistakes/strategies which we should avoid which will save us months of time from being wasted. | which will save us months of | Time | from being wasted. | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good course over all. If you know a bit about linear algebra the course can get a little borring some times... | can get a little borring some | Time | . . | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you for teaching me so much about machine learning, Andrew! After taking this course, I find myself quite interested in machine learning, and I will further my study in this field. At last, I highly recommend those who may be fascinated about machine learning to participate in this course, because it is worth your time and effort! | course, because it is worth your | Time | and effort! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great class. The concepts are well explained and saved me a lot of time on self-studying. Thank you, teacher Ng and Coursera! | and saved me a lot of | Time | on self-studying. Thank you, teacher Ng | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I got a lot out of this course! The course was challenging and well worth the time I spent in it. Especially useful was that the instructor used a lot of mathematics and examples. I highly recommend this - and have told several people I know from "Data Science" groups about it. | was challenging and well worth the | Time | I spent in it. Especially useful | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent course. I knew virtually nothing about machine learning prior to doing this course, and now I feel I have a good understanding of the various models and their underlying assumptions, applications and limitations. Prof. Andrew Ng is a superb teacher - a leader in his field who is prepared to take the time to carefully and patiently explain the ML concepts in detail but with an eye to their practical application. I am most grateful to him and his team for taking the time to put together such a wonderful course. | who is prepared to take the | Time | to carefully and patiently explain the | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent course. I knew virtually nothing about machine learning prior to doing this course, and now I feel I have a good understanding of the various models and their underlying assumptions, applications and limitations. Prof. Andrew Ng is a superb teacher - a leader in his field who is prepared to take the time to carefully and patiently explain the ML concepts in detail but with an eye to their practical application. I am most grateful to him and his team for taking the time to put together such a wonderful course. | and his team for taking the | Time | to put together such a wonderful | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Fantastic course, could not have been any better ! Very wise way to invest your time. Thank you very much to Andrew Ng for this. | Very wise way to invest your | Time | Thank you very much to Andrew | Positive | 0.82 | 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. | to give back to community some | Time | soon. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A great introduction to Machine Learning techniques. Because learners do not build assignments from the ground up, do not expect to be adept at implementing any of the tools taught here. Figuring out what had already been done required about 40% of my time solving the exercises. Some errors in the provided code are not corrected, so check the errata! | done required about 40% of my | Time | solving the exercises. Some errors in | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am a big advocate of MOOCs as it definitely democratize education. Only challenge with MOOCs is that over time they become too monotonous and one looses out the interest. I've tried to take up few machine learning courses over past few years, but never got past first few steps. I am still in the going through the course, but so far it has been an outstanding experience. Not only the content is engaging, it has been really simplified. If you're new to Machine learning, I can't recommend this highly enough. | challenge with MOOCs is that over | Time | they become too monotonous and one | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | As stated famously stated by Einstein, "Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler", Andrew Ng and team has made this course simpler for anyone with minimal mathematical knowledge and programming skills to learn machine learning in short time. I am sure this gives a solid foundation to build upon. Thanks a ton to Andrew and team! | to learn machine learning in short | Time | I am sure this gives a | Positive | 0.87 | 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 | very, very poor video editing (many | Time | it's clear some parts of the | Negative | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Fantastic course! Prof Andrew shared the various concepts in a clear, succinct and easy to understand manner. The various relevant and practical examples also helped to reinforce my learning. Definitely well worth the time and effort! | my learning. Definitely well worth the | Time | and effort! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very basic and superficial course. Apologies each time derivatives need to be used. | basic and superficial course. Apologies each | Time | derivatives need to be used. | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is one of the best machine learning class i have seen. I have see the actual Stanford course for this class and the Coursera class is very almost the same. This teacher is awesome and really knows his stuff. I use this course as a reference to machine learning. Taken it several times | to machine learning. Taken it several | Time | | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I just feel a strong urge to express my feelings after having completed this splendid course. I really feel completely transformed after completing it right now. It can literally feel the changes inside my brain's neural circuits taking place. I didn't took this course just by accident. I am a currently an undergraduate student of Computer Engineering and I was already interested in Machine Learning from my first year at University. I even got a book by Tom Mitchell with some difficulty but I couldn't read it much. Then I ended up on this course on Coursera and I have to say that in the modern world, education is better off being in the form of MOOCs than the traditional concept of learning by books. I can't describe verbally how beneficial this course have been for me. Even though, there is a thing that I'd like share: I couldn't complete this course in just one session. In fact, I could complete it in 4 complete sessions, thanks to the Switching Sessions feature present on Coursera. I had a lot hurdles along with this course and I also couldn't be regular on the internet. Once in the middle of the second session, I deferred it to complete another MOOC here on Coursera called "Learning How to Learn" and it was, again, an impressive course. One of the most frustrating yet very knowledgeable portion of this course was the programming exercises on Octave. I had to install a Kubuntu besides my Windows OS and ran it on dual-boot. There were so many other hurdles but I finally went through them, though taking a lot of time. This whole journey has been very insightful and interesting and truly, it has left an indelible impression on me. I have immense respect for Professor Andrew Ng for helping out multitude of students, including me. There was nothing in the course that I didn't love. I enjoyed every bit of it through every byte. The hurdles like those programming exercises had also been a source of huge joy when I was able to complete them after hours of fiddling around with the Octave codes. In the end, I want to say that I feel highly privileged having been able to find and complete this course. And, not to mention, it's nature of being totally free of cost allows students belonging to any class of society from any part of the world to readily benefit from it. I thank the Professor and the whole team involved from the depth of my heart. | them, though taking a lot of | Time | This whole journey has been very | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | About me: I'm a professional industrial control systems programmer. About this course: It contains challenging math for someone who has been out of school for 25 years. I'm no where close to the 3 hour time estimate for the exercises (more like +12 hours) but the course content and presentation is exceptional. This is the course that is finally giving me a working nuts a bolts understanding of machine learning, AI, and neural networks. | where close to the 3 hour | Time | estimate for the exercises (more like | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is a great way to begin studying machine learning, and developing intuition. I tried it a couple of years ago, with my background somewhat lacking. At the time I could follow everything, but I gave up eventually. Now coming with a little more mathematical maturity and software development knowledge, this isn't hard, and it is simply the perfect gateway drug to an amazing world :) | my background somewhat lacking. At the | Time | I could follow everything, but I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Ng and the entire coursera team on pulling off such a great introductory course. Honestly, machine learning is such a vast topic, that every nook and cranny of the internet has some opinion or the other on its methods. It can get pretty daunting for a beginner. This course is a perfect balance of theory and practice. It doesn't get too "mathy", nor does it get too dumbed down on it. The basic ideas, their implementations are discussed thoroughly, and Dr. Ng himself is such a smooth lecturer. A section on what to do after finishing this course would be helpful, as there are so many domains of machine learning, that it can get pretty confusing to decide. Also, I found the assignment tutorials a bit vague. Multiple times, I happened to scratch my head trying to figure what exactly the assignment in asking me to do. Clearer explanations of what to do in the assignments would be great. All in all, a wonderful course. Thanks a ton! | assignment tutorials a bit vague. Multiple | Time | I happened to scratch my head | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course and amazing teacher. Worth your time to go through the whole courses! | course and amazing teacher. Worth your | Time | to go through the whole courses! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | When I started this class I had only the fuzziest notions about what machine learning really is. By the end I had a solid understanding both of the underlying mathematical principles used in machine learning and of the practical considerations for applying it to real world problems. I really enjoyed Professor Ng's lectures and the course mentors are very knowledgeable and helpful. The programming exercises did a lot to reinforce the week's material. The time estimates are pretty good too which made it easier for me to organize my schedule and get all the work done. I'm very happy with the course and looking forward to using machine learning in my projects. | to reinforce the week's material. The | Time | estimates are pretty good too which | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Completing this course has been a wonderful experience! Professor Andrew Ng does a brilliant job in explaining concepts in a lucid manner without assuming you know related concepts beforehand. The concepts are applied to exciting,contemporary fields which makes the learning process all the more enjoyable! If you are enthusiastic about engaging in Machine Learning and are ready to invest some time and effort into it, this course is a must do! | and are ready to invest some | Time | and effort into it, this course | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Outstanding instructor and well-designed learning materials. It was my best investment of my time in this machine learning course. | was my best investment of my | Time | in this machine learning course. | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very clear and well taught lessons. Had a very good time learning many new concepts :) | taught lessons. Had a very good | Time | learning many new concepts :) | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Gently-paced and reasonable in terms of course work load, even for a busy person. This course greatly demystified machine learning for me. Alvin's lectures are friendly and easy to follow, and progress smoothly from one point of interest to the next, always taking time to briefly recap on precursor topics that were previously discussed. I really appreciate how the assignments focus on the core algorithms and their implementation. Ancillary implementation steps and a scaffolding for testing and viewing the results are already given for the learner to use, play with, and go back and reference for educational purposes if need be, for refreshing on use of tools such as plotting methods. The way the assignments are structured, putting emphasis on filling in the gaps with implementation of the important algorithms, makes completing assignments a very satisfying and fulfilling experience. I feared I would get caught up in preliminary steps, i.e. getting plots to display correctly or cleaning up the data, but that's all taken care of so that one can focus on practicing the techniques most relevant to the topic and algorithms. I only wish there were more assignments to complete, both to cover more of the course's material and to have more chances to practice algorithm prototyping in Octave/Matlab. | interest to the next, always taking | Time | to briefly recap on precursor topics | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | If you're new to ML, please, do yourself a favor and start here. You'll save yourself a LOT of time. A gem of a course. Thank you very much for taking the time to put together this course. | You'll save yourself a LOT of | Time | A gem of a course. Thank | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | If you're new to ML, please, do yourself a favor and start here. You'll save yourself a LOT of time. A gem of a course. Thank you very much for taking the time to put together this course. | you very much for taking the | Time | to put together this course. | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | All time best | All | Time | best | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Worth to invest your time. | Worth to invest your | Time | | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Professor Ng is a great teacher, his course is both challenging and satisfying. The exercises require you to take one step beyond the lecture -- not just parrot back the transcript -- you have to think about the implications of what you've just studied. Yet Ng's presentations are lucid and informative and that next step is obvious, once you think about it. My greatest challenge is that, although I have been programming for decades, I've only dabbled in a functional language like Octave and my last math class dates back to the 70s. However, the math requirements are not onerous and I'm struggling through the Octave assignments with some success. Although the course is 11 weeks there are more than 16 lectures as some weeks have two complete sets of lectures PLUS there are assignments every week that take a few hours to complete. So while there is a little more work in this course than in other Coursera offerings there is great value for the money and time spent. If you're interested in Machine Learning this course is a great place to start. | great value for the money and | Time | spent. If you're interested in Machine | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's worth spending time on this course. I've learned a lot, and I will keep doing this jod till I pass the final. | It's worth spending | Time | on this course. I've learned a | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A very good introduction to Machine Learning. Insightful and whets your appetite for more. Would like to request a little more information on applying and interpreting PCA. Thank you for a very nice time and would wholeheartedly recommend this course to others who want to know more about machine learning. | Thank you for a very nice | Time | and would wholeheartedly recommend this course | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was a very good start to Machine learning for me. I have learned a lot, yet i think the programming assignments were too easy to do and most of the time the answer was almost given directly. I think more challenging assignments would be better | to do and most of the | Time | the answer was almost given directly. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Best course I've ever taken part in. Everything explained very deeply and comprehensively. I highly reccomend spending time with this course, you won't regret it. | and comprehensively. I highly reccomend spending | Time | with this course, you won't regret | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent! I got a degree in Machine Learning at UCL, and both during and after my studies I found clear explanations from Professor Andrew Ng when I most needed them. The course is designed this way: each thing taught by Andrew is tested, evaluated, so one can monitor his/her advance all the time. I myself am a teacher in my country, and think that this is the way a teacher should design his courses, creating resources to monitor the learning of the students on the go, all the time, with plenty of simple exercises together with few difficult projects and tests. | can monitor his/her advance all the | Time | I myself am a teacher in | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent! I got a degree in Machine Learning at UCL, and both during and after my studies I found clear explanations from Professor Andrew Ng when I most needed them. The course is designed this way: each thing taught by Andrew is tested, evaluated, so one can monitor his/her advance all the time. I myself am a teacher in my country, and think that this is the way a teacher should design his courses, creating resources to monitor the learning of the students on the go, all the time, with plenty of simple exercises together with few difficult projects and tests. | students on the go, all the | Time | with plenty of simple exercises together | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is an excellent first course in Machine Learning and is definitely worth one's time. The programming exercises took me a little longer to complete than the recommended 3 hours, but the feeling of satisfaction on getting them right is priceless. | Learning and is definitely worth one's | Time | The programming exercises took me a | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I started this course thinking that it's more of an introduction on machine learning, but it lays down a solid foundation for us to be able to understand complex ML applications that are in use today. It drills down to the basics and pushes you to your limits. Many a time, you're like 'Oh , this seems easy', but it's only when you get yourself to think and code that you realize that there's a lot more to the problem! It's been a wonderful experience. Thanks Andrew Ng, Thanks Coursera | you to your limits. Many a | Time | you're like 'Oh , this seems | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are ton of resources for me to learn Machine Learning. But if I have to choose one, I will choose this course. Machine Learning becomes very clear and beautiful after watching lectures. I always have excitement every time I open the course. Thanks Andrew and Coursera. | lectures. I always have excitement every | Time | I open the course. Thanks Andrew | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course helped me get a good ground knowledge about machine learning. It was certainly worth the time! | learning. It was certainly worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am very pleased with this course. It was well-taught, challenging, useful, and relevant to my current projects. I found myself saying "wow" more that a couple of times. Even the lectures on "side topics" like pipeline and algorithm evaluation were very useful. It was well thought-out. Thank you. | wow" more that a couple of | Time | Even the lectures on " side | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Wonderful experience, first time I did an online lecture. I have learned a lot wherever and whenever I wanted to. | Wonderful experience, first | Time | I did an online lecture. I | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Although this course was recorded in 2011, I have found it incredibly valuable. Professor Andrew Ng presents exceptionally well providing a strong logic and clear thought allowing you to follow along and understand. Additionally, due to the fact that this was recorded in 2011, I think allows people like myself who don't have much experience with the ML topic to learn the basics as it was taught then. Many times, topics get very confusing as they grow and evolve. The level of information and concepts presented are fantastic and I've gotten so much out of my time and efforts. Thanks to Professor Ng and all of the moderators and mentors that are still active answering questions. | as it was taught then. Many | Time | topics get very confusing as they | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Although this course was recorded in 2011, I have found it incredibly valuable. Professor Andrew Ng presents exceptionally well providing a strong logic and clear thought allowing you to follow along and understand. Additionally, due to the fact that this was recorded in 2011, I think allows people like myself who don't have much experience with the ML topic to learn the basics as it was taught then. Many times, topics get very confusing as they grow and evolve. The level of information and concepts presented are fantastic and I've gotten so much out of my time and efforts. Thanks to Professor Ng and all of the moderators and mentors that are still active answering questions. | gotten so much out of my | Time | and efforts. Thanks to Professor Ng | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A very good overview of the basics of Machine Learning. As a novice to computerized data sorting, I felt this course provided the best mix of practical and theoretical backgrounds for some very useful algorithms. The MATLAB assignments take some time to complete so planning ahead will be helpful. | algorithms. The MATLAB assignments take some | Time | to complete so planning ahead will | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great introduction course to machine learning. Coming to the class I wasn't sure if the math involved would be too complex to follow. But Professor Ng's clear explanation of the concept and intuition behind complex algorithms made them much easier to understand or dare I say enjoyable. The programming exercises are not too difficult either once you get over the first hump of familiarizing yourself with Octave or Matlab (I used Octave for the first time for this course). | (I used Octave for the first | Time | for this course). | Positive | 0.83 | 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. | be quite confusing for me at | Time | UPDATE: I am now finishing the | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | at times oversimplified but an excellent course for all! | at | Time | oversimplified but an excellent course for | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course offers an insight to most of the machine learning techniques currently deployed. However, it does not go in depth for any of it. Amazing programming exercises, very well structured, very helpful and easily understandable. They make sure that you only implement what is relevant to the course and all else clutter (reading, typechecking, etc) is already in place for you. The instructor is easily understandable and the presentations are very well structured. Coming from an engineering/computing background, would hope for more math and insights, but this is a course that can be taken by economics or other majors. Really enjoyed it and has prepared me to delve deeper into machine learning and craft ML systems as part of my school or in my free time. | my school or in my free | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Except the first two weeks of hard time on finding my way around the course management and its huge resources, the team of lecturers and mentors have done a great job on the preparation of this course. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and skill online. I've learned a lot and plan to continue learning more on Machine Learning. | the first two weeks of hard | Time | on finding my way around the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you for taking all the effort and time to prepare this course. Can't say more! | for taking all the effort and | Time | to prepare this course. Can't say | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | best course and very challenging. If you are a beginner in coding and programming, you need to spend more time (double than normal)in this course | programming, you need to spend more | Time | (double than normal)in this course | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I'm just finishing the 7th week, and the pace and material is just right for me. I have a math background, and have been working in software development for 17 years. You should be able to participate in this with a modest math background, and minimal computer science experience. Some assignments can be challenging, but they are definitely possible to complete in my spare time with some concerted effort. This seems to be a solid foundation to machine learning concepts. I enjoy the mathematical explanations of the algorithms. | possible to complete in my spare | Time | with some concerted effort. This seems | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Superb course. Andrew is a likeable expert on this topic and keeps the messages efficiently simple. I'm from a non-programming background and this course although challenging at times was doable. | and this course although challenging at | Time | was doable. | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | No words, Amazing. Coursera brought this course on right time to the market. that too for free. Thanks A lo | Coursera brought this course on right | Time | to the market. that too for | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course. Taking it again to refresh. Doing a certification as well this time. | Doing a certification as well this | Time | | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great grounding in the just the right amount of detail of the most popular ML algorithms. Very clear and precise lectures, especially good when combined with the 'speed up' options. Even though you will undoubtable be using different languages for coding real applications than Octave/Matlab, the exercises are still very useful because they are pitched at just the right level of difficultly; they require you to understand the scripts and the system as a whole, but you are not required to become proficient enough to build the whole systems in Octave yourself which would be a waste of your time. | would be a waste of your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am halfway through the course and while the course is able to give good intuitions of what's going on at any one point in time it often lacks dept. The real reason I'm rating it 3/5, though, is that the mathematical notation is all over the place. You will find a matrix product such as A*B' only to go on and implement A'*B. This is SO confusing. I would still recommend this course, but you should definitely record every single lesson again without mistakes and fix those errors. | on at any one point in | Time | it often lacks dept. The real | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. The instructor has spent enough time to prepare the course and his explanations for the subject matter technicalities is as simple as it can get. One would learn the basic principles in an intuitive way. Highly recommended. | course. The instructor has spent enough | Time | to prepare the course and his | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course! The material is informative and applicable and it is presented in a clear and efficient manner. Well worth the time! | and efficient manner. Well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course had fantastic content, and very clear lecturing style, and minimal errors. At times I felt the lectures were a bit too long and repetitive, and found myself jumping through them quickly. I found that Andrew took minutes to say something that should only take 10 seconds; but I am aware that most students would appreciate this. The assignments were great, only with a few bits of information lacking and one assignment requiring me to dig around in the Discussion Boards for a solution (an error in the supplied code was causing me to fail the assignment). If I could give 4.5 stars I would, but I can't give the course 5 stars given the points above. Overall: Very enjoyable and insightful! | lecturing style, and minimal errors. At | Time | I felt the lectures were a | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Loved it. I was able to take this course while taking a graduate school course and working a full time job. Most of the work fit into a few nights or on the weekend. The assignments were challenging but I learned a lot and it's coming in handy in my graduate school research as well. I'll be back for more courses. | school course and working a full | Time | job. Most of the work fit | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was a great introduction into the field of Machine Learning, covering multiple approaches and possible applications, all spread between a series of simple projects and easy-to-follow lecture videos. Many of the terms used were highly technical, and it could be difficult to keep them separate at times, but the way they were presented offered a chance for association with mathematics rather than just a word. Rated 4/5 for ability to break down complex topics and subject material. as well as the depth of the explanations, but with insufficient emphasis on application to reasonably transfer these concepts from academia to the real world. | difficult to keep them separate at | Time | but the way they were presented | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Let me say that this is a great course and that I enjoyed it very much! My only problem is with the assignment that are, in my opinion, a bit limited and most of the time they focus on liner algebra implementations rather than give a better understanding of the algorithm. Most of the time the assignments focus on implementing a formula where the algorithm itself is already written for us. That is good as a first step but in the long run it doesn't give you some practical skills when you want to apply the algorithm to an external dataset. I would suggest to add some challenges (maybe ungraded) keggle style, like provided this dataset try to get a score better than a value. This will spark some discussion and it would help to apply the concepts and the practical tricks to a real (chewed) problem. | bit limited and most of the | Time | they focus on liner algebra implementations | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Let me say that this is a great course and that I enjoyed it very much! My only problem is with the assignment that are, in my opinion, a bit limited and most of the time they focus on liner algebra implementations rather than give a better understanding of the algorithm. Most of the time the assignments focus on implementing a formula where the algorithm itself is already written for us. That is good as a first step but in the long run it doesn't give you some practical skills when you want to apply the algorithm to an external dataset. I would suggest to add some challenges (maybe ungraded) keggle style, like provided this dataset try to get a score better than a value. This will spark some discussion and it would help to apply the concepts and the practical tricks to a real (chewed) problem. | of the algorithm. Most of the | Time | the assignments focus on implementing a | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is carefully designed. Prof. Ng must spend much time on it. He focuses on concepts and practical applications of machine learning, and purposely left the math behind. This course is an excellent introduction to machine learning. Thanks prof. Ng. | designed. Prof. Ng must spend much | Time | on it. He focuses on concepts | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is the second time I take this course. I have already got a certificate of this course in 2014. But still I love everything taught in this course! Andrew rules! | This is the second | Time | I take this course. I have | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a very good introductory course to Machine Learning that covers many different algorithms for a variety of applications. Not only does it approach the subject in a simple and intuitive way, it also provides very good advice for implementing and running these algorithms. The programming assignments are well done and, through the use of provided code, allow you to glimpse at interesting applications of machine learning without having to spend too much time on boilerplate/preprocessing code. | without having to spend too much | Time | on boilerplate/preprocessing code. | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course. I feel like this is oriented towards high-school students, a little rudimentary at times, but nevertheless covers a great breadth of subject. The course would be way to dense if he tried to go for depth as well, and would be appropriate for a much smaller audience, so I respect his decision. | high-school students, a little rudimentary at | Time | but nevertheless covers a great breadth | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A good balance of theory and practical tips. MATLAB assignments take time but most of the work is done for you, so you only need to apply the concepts you've just learned. (Optional) deadlines help a lot too! | and practical tips. MATLAB assignments take | Time | but most of the work is | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Was a little too basic. Would have preferred more flesh (both implementational and mathematical) on the bones. I also found it absurd that each time the professor introduced a very basic linear algebra concept he kept saying somewhat patronizingly "this is for the experts in linear algebra". Come on! If one is taking a machine learning course, one can expect more from the students. Otherwise the course ends up being a flaky tap-dance on the surface of the material. | also found it absurd that each | Time | the professor introduced a very basic | Positive | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Well prepared and well delivered. You need some serious understanding of stats and algebra but if you are ready to make the effort it worth every minutes of your time | it worth every minutes of your | Time | | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is absolutely fabulous. It's rigorous and requires programming and mathematical experience but well worth the investment in time. | but well worth the investment in | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a MUST attend course for all scientists willing to extend their careers in machine learning. It covers in depth machine-learning algorithms. By just watching the lectures one can easily implement the algorithms presented in the course. If you have a tool-driven view point toward machine learning, maybe this is not a perfect course. Rather I recommend the "Practical Machine Learning" course by Jeffrey Leek from university of John Hopkins Bloomberg presented here on Coursera. By just watching the first lecture I started to love Andrew NG. He is a modest and humble teacher that attracts his audiences. In the final lecture he thanks the students for attending and putting time on this marvelous class and that is not something that we would expect from a professor from a high prestigious university. Thank you Andrew for that. | the students for attending and putting | Time | on this marvelous class and that | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course that gives you a deeper insight into many popular machine learning algorithms, without forgetting about the practical applications. Even if you miss some mathematics background or your last math course was already some time ago - the course teaches you all the necessary knowledge. | last math course was already some | Time | ago - the course teaches you | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am very pleased with the course, and don't regret the time spent. The way the topics are explained is very understandable even for new student, good examples was given and topics covered are fundamental. Thank you, I gained good knowledge! | the course, and don't regret the | Time | spent. The way the topics are | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Hi. This is a great course which would be made even better with the small change I describe below. I was referred here by Nicole who was handling this as Support Case #1188060. I understand the mentors have been seeking this improvement for some time. Please let me know if I can clarify or assist in any way. Thanks in advance. ---- Support Case #1188060 ---- Hi. I'm writing regarding the Machine Learning course taught by Andrew Ng of Stanford. I have learned there is a compilation of "errata," known errors in the videos and course materials for each week, which has been made available in per-week links like the following: https://share.coursera.org/wiki/index.php/ML:Errata:_Week_7 I found these links only after digging through discussions. In my own discussions afterwards, I learned that I wasn't the only one having trouble finding the errata. Apparently it's a long-standing problem which creates extra work for mentors as well as slowing down students. Would it be possible to provide the errata links, or a link to the Machine Learning Course wiki, in a dedicated section of the Course Content? This would help a lot of people. Please see the discussion below for more perspective. https://www.coursera.org/learn/machine-learning/discussions/RQNTlee5EeWTdBIkpCpI1Q Thanks for your consideration. Tom :-) | been seeking this improvement for some | Time | Please let me know if I | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Prof Andrew displays tremendous teaching skill. He is able to get down to the level of novices and explain things with visualization without getting too mathematical. At the same time introduces complexity in a phased manner. Awesome course. Thanks Prof and thanks Coursera. | getting too mathematical. At the same | Time | introduces complexity in a phased manner. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Since this is my very first online course, I don't have too much to compare it to, but I thought the lectures and the quizzes / programming problems were very focused. Especially the coding where a lot of the "grunt work" was done for you, allowing you to focus on the actual machine learning algorithm which was helpful in grasping the application of these complicated concepts. I especially liked the later part of the course where emphasis was made on understanding how to make educated decisions about where to spend time enhancing the performance of the ML code & training set. This will save the potential ML student hours and hours of work. Thanks to the professor, producer, and moderator(s). | educated decisions about where to spend | Time | enhancing the performance of the ML | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent class, in terms of specific content and didactical approach. All addressed topics are well motivated with real examples, and elaborated in great details, at the right pace. Lecture videos are clear, very accurate, and very accessible at the same time. Lab exercises are challenging and very much helping in fully grasping the concepts. One of the best classes I have ever attended, much better of many courses I attended in my university years. Thank you very much Professor Andrew Ng, Coursera, and Stanford ! | and very accessible at the same | Time | Lab exercises are challenging and very | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great and Engaging videos , Just enough time is given to assimilate the course content . Love the exercises. | and Engaging videos , Just enough | Time | is given to assimilate the course | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thanks so much! I have really learnt a lot and I have particularly appreciated the pedagogy. The mix of programming in matlab, learning the maths, illustrating with real examples was perfectly balanced. Although I am still a beginner in this field, I feel well equipped already. The advices given to assess and improve along the machine learning design journey are essential to me. I did not practice at all mathematics in the last 20 years and I did not particularly liked it at that time but during this course I was impatient to study in the evenings and the weekends. I would not have bet on it! David (41) | not particularly liked it at that | Time | but during this course I was | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course!! Completely worth your time. | Excellent course! ! Completely worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.77 | 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. | top notch. At no point of | Time | would you wonder how to do | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng is a skilled instructor who is adept at covering the material in a manner which makes it digestible to folks who may even have been a few years removed from their last university level Algebra and math courses and who have not been directly programming for quite some time. While I had been working on telemetry and big data analytics it was from a business perspective with a decent amount of common sense understanding about what was underneath making it work. I now feel like a have a good amount of depth into the details of the techniques and application of the high level concepts. Thanks Andrew! | been directly programming for quite some | Time | While I had been working on | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very interesting course, very cool teacher. Thanks for allowing me to go through it. I have a busy job, a baby at home... but it was worth the time... I recommend! | . but it was worth the | Time | . . I recommend! | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I had a great time taking this class and working through the assignments. Thank you Andrew for taking the time to put this wonderful class together. - Ikenna | I had a great | Time | taking this class and working through | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I had a great time taking this class and working through the assignments. Thank you Andrew for taking the time to put this wonderful class together. - Ikenna | Thank you Andrew for taking the | Time | to put this wonderful class together. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are too many mistakes and misleading statements made in the course material. There were a lot difficulties with submitting assignments in order to move forward in the course. I had to give up because I don't have time to be bogged down like this. The students' comments and discussion would be useful if they can be accessed from within each lesson. I can't make heads or tails of what the discussions were referring to, when they are all clumped together at the course web site instead. | give up because I don't have | Time | to be bogged down like this. | Negative | 0.88 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Nice teaching from the trainer Complex concepts are detailed out step by step breaking it to small pieces Real time examples are included to explain the concepts Overall a great experience in learning | breaking it to small pieces Real | Time | examples are included to explain the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really enjoyed taking this course. Learned quite few concepts that I wasn't aware of before. If you haven't done math for a while (but were good enough to understand the concept at your time) and dying to understand ML concepts but doesn't want to(or have time) to 'review' full math again this is the course for you. | to understand the concept at your | Time | and dying to understand ML concepts | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really enjoyed taking this course. Learned quite few concepts that I wasn't aware of before. If you haven't done math for a while (but were good enough to understand the concept at your time) and dying to understand ML concepts but doesn't want to(or have time) to 'review' full math again this is the course for you. | concepts but doesn't want to(or have | Time | to 'review' full math again this | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course serves as an excellent introduction to machine learning. I had a full time job for the duration of the time I spent working on this course, and I found I was able to immediately apply the things I learned in this course to my job, sometimes even really surprising and impressing my superiors with the techniques that were covered. Andrew is an inspiring and effective teacher, and I feel I will retain the knowledge I gained for many years to come. Suffice it to say my passion for this field has been ignited. | machine learning. I had a full | Time | job for the duration of the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course serves as an excellent introduction to machine learning. I had a full time job for the duration of the time I spent working on this course, and I found I was able to immediately apply the things I learned in this course to my job, sometimes even really surprising and impressing my superiors with the techniques that were covered. Andrew is an inspiring and effective teacher, and I feel I will retain the knowledge I gained for many years to come. Suffice it to say my passion for this field has been ignited. | job for the duration of the | Time | I spent working on this course, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Good thing is this course is easy enough to keep me insisting on it. Bad thing is, to some extent, I may need some time to figure out how to use the technique. :D | some extent, I may need some | Time | to figure out how to use | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a fantastic course! I have a computational physics/chemistry background but had no prior machine learning experience. This course allowed me to gain a solid foundation in machine learning. The lectures are very well paced and the exercises and revision questions well thought out. Enough real-world context is given to prevent things from being too abstract, but the great bulk of the time is spent actually learning how to apply machine learning. Well worth the money. Thanks Andrew! | but the great bulk of the | Time | is spent actually learning how to | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have seen other machine learning courses but it cannot get any simpler than this. Most of the other courses will directly dive you into complex formulas and theorems. But Mr. Andrew Ng made it so easy for me to understand the basic concepts with his real world examples that now I can apply them in my own projects with ease. The evaluation system is also pretty good with hands on assignments. The quizzes were a little bit tough at times, but they forced me to go back to the corresponding topic and review it so that my concepts become clear. The assignments were also realistic and at times challenging for people using Matlab or Octave for first time. Thank you very much for this course. I hope this will help a lot in my career as a researcher. | were a little bit tough at | Time | but they forced me to go | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have seen other machine learning courses but it cannot get any simpler than this. Most of the other courses will directly dive you into complex formulas and theorems. But Mr. Andrew Ng made it so easy for me to understand the basic concepts with his real world examples that now I can apply them in my own projects with ease. The evaluation system is also pretty good with hands on assignments. The quizzes were a little bit tough at times, but they forced me to go back to the corresponding topic and review it so that my concepts become clear. The assignments were also realistic and at times challenging for people using Matlab or Octave for first time. Thank you very much for this course. I hope this will help a lot in my career as a researcher. | assignments were also realistic and at | Time | challenging for people using Matlab or | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have seen other machine learning courses but it cannot get any simpler than this. Most of the other courses will directly dive you into complex formulas and theorems. But Mr. Andrew Ng made it so easy for me to understand the basic concepts with his real world examples that now I can apply them in my own projects with ease. The evaluation system is also pretty good with hands on assignments. The quizzes were a little bit tough at times, but they forced me to go back to the corresponding topic and review it so that my concepts become clear. The assignments were also realistic and at times challenging for people using Matlab or Octave for first time. Thank you very much for this course. I hope this will help a lot in my career as a researcher. | using Matlab or Octave for first | Time | Thank you very much for this | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The podium which the MOOC's provide to gain knowledge simply amazes me. I will remain grateful to the people like Andrew Ng for sharing knowledge so beautifully. I personally was attracted to the idea of discussing machine learning applications via the programming assignment, they kept me motivated in difficult times. I look forward to doing other interesting courses in the data science track. Thank You!! | they kept me motivated in difficult | Time | I look forward to doing other | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course. Makes sure to plan for the time to watch the movies and enough time for the assignments. They are well worth it and will re-enforce the video lecture material. | Makes sure to plan for the | Time | to watch the movies and enough | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course. Makes sure to plan for the time to watch the movies and enough time for the assignments. They are well worth it and will re-enforce the video lecture material. | to watch the movies and enough | Time | for the assignments. They are well | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | very well taught!Definetly worth you time. | very well taught! Definetly worth you | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The teaching content is excellent. The instructor's explanation is clear and intuitive. It would be more helpful if the instructor can address the forums at times rather than leaving it entirely to the TAs. | instructor can address the forums at | Time | rather than leaving it entirely to | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent!!! Andrew Ng is not only a great researcher but a great teacher. He explains in a very clear way complex concepts and keeps you interested all the time. Great course to start in ML | and keeps you interested all the | Time | Great course to start in ML | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course - simple, direct, and hands on but at the same time comprehensive and deep enough so that students of all levels can follow along and learn! You'll learn from the basics of 2D linear regression all the way through very important non-linear models for classification and regression (such as logistic regression, neural networks, SVM, collaborative filters, etc). Prof Ng and touches on many relevant topics like managing large datasets, convergence issues, debigging and error checking, and so on. | hands on but at the same | Time | comprehensive and deep enough so that | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course! The instructor walks you through all the learning process. You can take your time while watching the classes and it does not expect you to have a huge previous knowledge to understand what is going on. I really recommend the course to everybody that wants to get in touch with machine learning. | learning process. You can take your | Time | while watching the classes and it | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Outstanding Course. I almost got addicted to it. I wished it would have gone for ever ! For the first time in last 10 years, I started to love Bangalore Traffic - as more time in traffic meant more time for me to go through the course material ! | for ever ! For the first | Time | in last 10 years, I started | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Outstanding Course. I almost got addicted to it. I wished it would have gone for ever ! For the first time in last 10 years, I started to love Bangalore Traffic - as more time in traffic meant more time for me to go through the course material ! | love Bangalore Traffic - as more | Time | in traffic meant more time for | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Outstanding Course. I almost got addicted to it. I wished it would have gone for ever ! For the first time in last 10 years, I started to love Bangalore Traffic - as more time in traffic meant more time for me to go through the course material ! | more time in traffic meant more | Time | for me to go through the | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My first modeling course, and while at times complex, I have never understood more clearly the fundamental concepts of modeling. Professor Ng's ability to break down complex ideas into straightforward concepts is unparalleled. | first modeling course, and while at | Time | complex, I have never understood more | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is so far the best MOOC I have done. The small exercices are very good for practicing but do not require too much time. The lessons are not too long but are very useful. | but do not require too much | Time | The lessons are not too long | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. Instructor spend a lot of time on clearing the concepts. It cleared many of my misconceptions. | course. Instructor spend a lot of | Time | on clearing the concepts. It cleared | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am half way through this course and I feel this is the best online course available today. The content is superb, the subject is interesting and the instructor/the professor explains the topic in a very easy way. One more thing which makes this course great is the tools - the quizes and assignment framework (including the submission process) is very well designed. I aim to pursue career in Machine Learning at some point in time in (near) future. I am sure I am on right track. Anyone new to ML must start with this course. | Machine Learning at some point in | Time | in (near) future. I am sure | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | start to be not worth your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | One of those benchmark courses to whet your appetite for ML as a career! I've done the course before, but couldn't complete properly. This time, I'm determined! | before, but couldn't complete properly. This | Time | I'm determined! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing class. Extremely glad I took it. It was hard at times, but Prof Ng is an absolute boss at teaching and explaining difficult concepts! I would highly recommend this course to anyone who's interested in learning about Machine Learning in general. | took it. It was hard at | Time | but Prof Ng is an absolute | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent but very time consuming | Excellent but very | Time | consuming | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Didn't have time to finish it, but i'll get it next time! great content. | Didn't have | Time | to finish it, but i'll get | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Didn't have time to finish it, but i'll get it next time! great content. | it, but i'll get it next | Time | great content. | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course !! Every Computer Science student should take this course. It is very basic and won't require a lot of time and the learning would outweigh everything. | and won't require a lot of | Time | and the learning would outweigh everything. | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My CS friend recommended me to take this course to learn more about how to use data in business, after he heard that I wanted to program an app for food. he warned me about the great deal of math involved (mainly linear algebra). me being a physics/engineering major I naturally got even more excited (it turned out that he was right, and it would also be a huge plus to know multivariate calculus, and I can see myself struggle with the concepts had I not studied both these topics to bits in school). incidentally, this was my first online coursera experience. I can tell you it will be life changing experience. No longer do I have to physically travel somewhere to listen to lectures or hand in assignments, nor download lecture notes off of the school server. This is a 24/7 always on always available service, with the best TA's to answer your questions if you get stuck on homework assignments and quizzes. Everything in the coding assignments tests your knowledge of the course lectures and is designed such that you can complete it in the shortest possible amount of time while reaping the maximum amount of benefit. It is "easy" sense does not require you to grind through mundane things like looking for your own training set data or writing code to plot and visualise the data, but it is "hard" in the sense that very often it takes an hour (or more) of studying the lectures and thinking to figure out how to solve the problem in the most efficient way as possible which often involves writing a single line of vectored matlab/octave code. It is more of an overview of the most important topics in machine learning, but will be a great springboard to go in depth into each aspect of it. Lastly, Andrew often offers wonderful insights into the day to day of machine learning professionals in his lecture videos, so I would advise watching every single minute of them to get the most out of the course instead of aiming to race over the finish line (which can be tempting at times when the deadline approaches) | in the shortest possible amount of | Time | while reaping the maximum amount of | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My CS friend recommended me to take this course to learn more about how to use data in business, after he heard that I wanted to program an app for food. he warned me about the great deal of math involved (mainly linear algebra). me being a physics/engineering major I naturally got even more excited (it turned out that he was right, and it would also be a huge plus to know multivariate calculus, and I can see myself struggle with the concepts had I not studied both these topics to bits in school). incidentally, this was my first online coursera experience. I can tell you it will be life changing experience. No longer do I have to physically travel somewhere to listen to lectures or hand in assignments, nor download lecture notes off of the school server. This is a 24/7 always on always available service, with the best TA's to answer your questions if you get stuck on homework assignments and quizzes. Everything in the coding assignments tests your knowledge of the course lectures and is designed such that you can complete it in the shortest possible amount of time while reaping the maximum amount of benefit. It is "easy" sense does not require you to grind through mundane things like looking for your own training set data or writing code to plot and visualise the data, but it is "hard" in the sense that very often it takes an hour (or more) of studying the lectures and thinking to figure out how to solve the problem in the most efficient way as possible which often involves writing a single line of vectored matlab/octave code. It is more of an overview of the most important topics in machine learning, but will be a great springboard to go in depth into each aspect of it. Lastly, Andrew often offers wonderful insights into the day to day of machine learning professionals in his lecture videos, so I would advise watching every single minute of them to get the most out of the course instead of aiming to race over the finish line (which can be tempting at times when the deadline approaches) | line (which can be tempting at | Time | when the deadline approaches) | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent, hands on program. Teaches not only the basics but a lot of detail. You feel like, you are getting the most out of this program not only an introduction and concepts. Only donwside: There is too much work given for people who have a daytime job and try to take this class on the side to improve themselfs. Dedication is required and time estimations are not accurate for those "part time" people. | improve themselfs. Dedication is required and | Time | estimations are not accurate for those | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent, hands on program. Teaches not only the basics but a lot of detail. You feel like, you are getting the most out of this program not only an introduction and concepts. Only donwside: There is too much work given for people who have a daytime job and try to take this class on the side to improve themselfs. Dedication is required and time estimations are not accurate for those "part time" people. | not accurate for those " part | Time | people. | Negative | 0.69 | 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. | and adequate test-cases. Well worth the | Time | invested. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The instructor is extremely clear. Very informative course to get an introduction to machine learning. The assignments are fairly easy, still some of them require some time. | still some of them require some | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng opens the Machine Learning world in an easy to understand way. Note - this course doesn't require any prerequisites, but understanding advanced mathematics (calculus) and programming languages is required to be successful. You may be able to learn these as you go or simply watch the videos and not "pass" the course, but I would spend some time practicing these skills before this course if you want the full experience. | course, but I would spend some | Time | practicing these skills before this course | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The lectures are great, and they are reinforced with the quizzes and programming exercises. The quizzes need critical thinking to get all of them correctly. The programming assignments are there to cover the basic concepts. The way the course it taught is suited for online courses. The topics are well-divided in short chunks, making it easier to watch the lectures at different times of the day. There are some mistakes on the English subtitles, but it doesn't hinder the learning. Overall, a well-taught course. | to watch the lectures at different | Time | of the day. There are some | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course if perfectly organized. It has just the right amount of complexity and forces you to think and understand what it is going on. Being proficient with Linear Algebra is a big plus, in particular with matrix operations. If you are not, not a bid deal, but I recommend spending a good amount of time on the review lessons. Trust me. The choice of Octave/Matlab as a programming language makes perfect sense. Not everyone is seasoned programmer. I found it is fairly easy to pick up Octave syntax and become quite proficient in a few days. The course has also a few Mentors active in the Discussion Forum that make your life a lot easier. | recommend spending a good amount of | Time | on the review lessons. Trust me. | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is a tough but great course. You need your passion and determination to finish this course - the homework really took me a long time. Besides learning about machine learning, the course also provide me a new angle to refresh my understanding of calculus, linear algebra and programming language. Great experience! It also gives you a genuine sense of achievement when you finally finish the course after all the hard work. The course can't make you an expert, but it's a very good start for learning about machine learning. Highly recommend! | homework really took me a long | Time | Besides learning about machine learning, the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Outstanding course. My only feedback is you force the students to use Octave/MATLAB. I used Python do all the assignments but I didn't bother submitting my answers to get credit for the course because I would have had to reimplement it again in Octave. Maybe give some more in-depth optional assignments? I would have liked to have actually implemented a SVM rather than use a lib (at-least one time). | than use a lib (at-least one | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The content of the course is very rich and first class, the instructor is great and. The software used is MATLAB or Octave. If you devote a lot of time and effort to this course, you will learn a lot about machine learning and algorithms used. The assignments are the most practical part of this course. | If you devote a lot of | Time | and effort to this course, you | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Absolutely incredible stuff! I enjoyed this course a little bit more than my university course as I could pace and time this course. About to finish and get a course certification. I recommend this to everyone! Andrew NG is an incredible lecturer who has not helped me learn Machine Learning but also helped cement a life long passion for Machine Learning. | course as I could pace and | Time | this course. About to finish and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good introduction and advanced insight in the field at the same time. A performance to get to the essential without getting entangled with the maths, while you will need at least a little understanding of algebra. | in the field at the same | Time | A performance to get to the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Dr. Ng is a conceptual teacher, gifted with the ability to convey concepts and directions in the course that provides pragmatic topical coverage with sufficient depth. I thoroughly enjoyed completing the course, and I hope he will find the time in the future to design and teach a course with more in-depth teachings in machine learning and statistics as well - which I will look forward to taking. | I hope he will find the | Time | in the future to design and | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is the best Machine Learning class I ever took, after taking several ML classes in real life and online. Unlike most other ML courses focusing on math, this class specifically emphasizes on how to analyze/debug a system. The programming exercises are extremely well-organized and helpful in implementing the algorithms and debug the performance problems. The instructor is doing a fantastic job in making things clear to people from all background. The videos may seem long and the programming exercises take a long time to complete. But the effort is so worth it. | the programming exercises take a long | Time | to complete. But the effort is | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is pretty fast paced as well in depth course on Machine Learning. First five weeks are hard and mainly focused on building foundation while rest of the weeks teaches very useful technique to broaden the knowledge. Professor Ng has done awesome job as well as all the mentors. There is so much information on the group discussion, I hardly had to post anything as most of the answers to my questions are already there. wiki page is great and I did read it before taking any quiz. Some quizzes are super hard and I had to attempt few times to pass those. | and I had to attempt few | Time | to pass those. | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent introduction to ML. Coming from a mathematical background, I felt that at times the course was a bit slow (e.g. Professor Ng would spend time performing steps on every element of a matrix, when a couple of examples would have sufficed), but jumping ahead in the video solved this problem easily. I was a bit more frustrated, however, with the few instances of, "here's the formula, you don't need to know the derivation." I guess those who want to understand the math behind the techniques can always look elsewhere, but Professor Ng obviously knows a great deal and is able to clearly and concisely explain difficult subjects, and so I was a bit disappointed to not be getting his instruction in the more difficult aspects. But, overall this course is great. In particular, I found the programming assignments to be excellent. They are a good level of difficulty, and manage to be quite interesting, as well. I will definitely hold onto the code I wrote for this course for reference as I move forward. Professor Ng, please create a more advanced course next! | mathematical background, I felt that at | Time | the course was a bit slow | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent introduction to ML. Coming from a mathematical background, I felt that at times the course was a bit slow (e.g. Professor Ng would spend time performing steps on every element of a matrix, when a couple of examples would have sufficed), but jumping ahead in the video solved this problem easily. I was a bit more frustrated, however, with the few instances of, "here's the formula, you don't need to know the derivation." I guess those who want to understand the math behind the techniques can always look elsewhere, but Professor Ng obviously knows a great deal and is able to clearly and concisely explain difficult subjects, and so I was a bit disappointed to not be getting his instruction in the more difficult aspects. But, overall this course is great. In particular, I found the programming assignments to be excellent. They are a good level of difficulty, and manage to be quite interesting, as well. I will definitely hold onto the code I wrote for this course for reference as I move forward. Professor Ng, please create a more advanced course next! | (e. g. Professor Ng would spend | Time | performing steps on every element of | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Dr. Ng does a great job transfering his knowledge and experience on the subject to the on-line students, describing in detail every equation and every subscript. Since I am new to Machine Learning, I will keep my notes from the Course as a reference. The only minus is that I had to pause many times the videos in order to write my notes. Maybe, it would be better if the slides were offered as downloads... Thanks a lot Coursera! Filoktimon Repoulias | that I had to pause many | Time | the videos in order to write | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | However good the material and lectures may be, the use of an outdated version of Octave (which is not Mac-friendly and exceedingly brittle, to the extent where the supplied code requires manual patching in Windows and Linux) is a complete turn-off and makes it nearly impossible to complete the assignments on time unless you're prepared to spend at least twice as much time debugging your setup as doing the actual assignments. I'll come back when this is done with R or Python. | impossible to complete the assignments on | Time | unless you're prepared to spend at | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | However good the material and lectures may be, the use of an outdated version of Octave (which is not Mac-friendly and exceedingly brittle, to the extent where the supplied code requires manual patching in Windows and Linux) is a complete turn-off and makes it nearly impossible to complete the assignments on time unless you're prepared to spend at least twice as much time debugging your setup as doing the actual assignments. I'll come back when this is done with R or Python. | spend at least twice as much | Time | debugging your setup as doing the | Negative | 0.9 | 1.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A truly fantastic course. Extremely useful, practical, relevant content and examples, plus such a great teacher as well as very helpful course staff and other students. Thanks Andrew, team and the rest of the students. For anyone considering doing the course, note that the time requirements can be a lot - the lectures are fine but two or three of the assignments took far more than 3 hours (if you plan on actually battling through the coding this is relevant. I'd highly recommend that anyone considering doing the course does the assignments since this is where the real magic happens - Andrew quite deviously leaves a bit of the theory to be fully worked out by yourself in the assignments). | doing the course, note that the | Time | requirements can be a lot - | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent and Clear. Very Simple and at the same time complex. Provides a great practical learning experience. | Very Simple and at the same | Time | complex. Provides a great practical learning | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My first course on Coursera and definitely worth it. The time load is 3-5 hours a week, which might be a scary number, but I'm glad I did it as I now have a nice overview of the things possible with ML. | Coursera and definitely worth it. The | Time | load is 3-5 hours a week, | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The standard for intro to machine learning. Everyone recommends this as a first start. It could be updated for newer practices, though. No trees, no cross validation folding, etc. Rather than submitting Octave code, it would be cool if you could write the program in a language of your choice. They create a random set of data each time, and you have to produce results within a certain tolerance of that dataset. | a random set of data each | Time | and you have to produce results | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | An excellent course! - easy to understand, programming exercises focus on the implementation of key ideas which saves lots of time in coding. | key ideas which saves lots of | Time | in coding. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really interesting so far. Learning a lot of cool things. Might be time for some updates as some of the course material seems really old. | lot of cool things. Might be | Time | for some updates as some of | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome class. I learned a lot, and I got to program in MATLAB for the first time in years. | program in MATLAB for the first | Time | in years. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's a good course for me to spend time on it . | good course for me to spend | Time | on it . | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The maths got a bit complicated at times and the Octave programming work was challenging to say the least but these are positive points. Sometimes similar courses are sometimes too easy and pitched at the beginner. This is certainly an intermediate to advanced course but I'd recommend it 100% to anyone who is thinking about gaining a deeper insight to how machine learning models work. | maths got a bit complicated at | Time | and the Octave programming work was | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thanks Prof. Andrew Ng, for your time and effort in compiling the course. Really enjoyed it and most importantly, I learnt a lot. Can't thank enough! Mayur Kulkarni, Pune,India. | Thanks Prof. Andrew Ng, for your | Time | and effort in compiling the course. | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, the teacher did a very good job explaining a very difficult subject to a group of students with signifficantly different backgrounds. The quizzes were easy to solve once you took the time to see all the related videos. There was a little bit of handholding in the programming assignmentes, but that may be due to the aforementioned backgrounds the student came up with. I'm a spanish speaking mechanical engineer with just a programming hobby and I was able to finish with a 99% grade. If I could do it, anyone can | to solve once you took the | Time | to see all the related videos. | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Although the course is requiring some time to spend on to benefit from, the topics covered are very well introduced with accurate examples and explanations to understand the practical side of this topic. Also, the programming assignments where really challenging while kept in line with the material provided during the classes. I definitely suggest this course to anyone interested in covering the basic and the most advanced topics in machine learning, having said that it still remain an introductory course to ML. Thanks a lot for the fun I had and the huge amount of new things I learned. | Although the course is requiring some | Time | to spend on to benefit from, | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very clear lectures. focusing a lot on making students understand the algorithms in addiction to teaching the algorithms. Also assignments are very nice. They are really practical examples such that we get a taste of what machine learning can do without having to spend a lot of time. | having to spend a lot of | Time | | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course. My only concern is that it goes slow at times and it feels like topics are being discussed repeatedly. I would rather have the wiki lecture notes prominently displayed for my reference rather than having to watch very nuanced lecture videos because I sit through a lot of uneccessary video out of concern that I will miss something important. | is that it goes slow at | Time | and it feels like topics are | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent survey course in Machine Learning for anyone who isn't an expert already. It moves at just the right pace to keep you challenged without being overwhelmed. The staff are very helpful, and the professor makes sure to get his point across before moving on. In fact, if I had to offer only one criticism it's that sometimes he will repeat the same thing over (many many times), which is unnecessary and thus sometimes frustrating because we have seek bars and speed control for the lectures. It's quite remarkable how well this course communicates a high-level understanding of the concepts without bogging it down with much of the scary math that is often associated with ML. For those of us who are interested in getting into the nuts and bolts, the professor makes sure to name concepts so that they can be further researched at one's leisure. He gives you what you need to solve the problem, but doesn't do it for you. I highly recommend this course for anybody interested in learning how many of the most useful technologies of this century actually work. | the same thing over (many many | Time | which is unnecessary and thus sometimes | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course ! Just had to re-pass all my assignments when the certificate became available, because the first time I passed them my identity was not verified. Also, it would be nice to have some kind of "download all the course's content" link at the end of the course, to be able to save the material for later reference. Thank you for this fantastic course ! | certificate became available, because the first | Time | I passed them my identity was | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was a pretty great course. With a focus on understanding and coding regression algorithms, I was engaged throughout the course. I'm a programmer with a physics B.Sc trying to make a shift away from product development and in to analytical problem solving. I found the lectures useful, the wiki useful when I didn't have time to watch the lectures, and the quizzes and assignments very practical. | wiki useful when I didn't have | Time | to watch the lectures, and the | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I liked the way concepts are being introduced. I got a decent understanding of every algorithm that's been discussed and really looking forward to apply the concepts for some real time applications. | apply the concepts for some real | Time | applications. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome comprehensive course. Highly recommended for anyone trying to get started with Machine Learning. The quizzes and assignments really test your knowledge and understanding. This course needed a lot of time and effort, but it was all worth it. | This course needed a lot of | Time | and effort, but it was all | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Coursera would benefit from more courses like this. The material is appropriate for beginners, but is quite profound for those who choose to spend more time "in class". The programming assignments are a great learning tool, and can teach much more than it's required to complete them. | those who choose to spend more | Time | " in class" . The programming | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course with good methodology. I liked the assignments and I was motivated all the time. I really recommend this course. | and I was motivated all the | Time | I really recommend this course. | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really useful and fantastic course. But the tutor's words are so fast and the course's content is a little hard to understand. Maybe give us more time will be better. | to understand. Maybe give us more | Time | will be better. | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really enjoyed learning the intuition behind machine learning. I also benefited from knowing whether more data would be helpful or not as well as whether it is worth my time to improve the accuracy of a certain part of my algorithm! | as whether it is worth my | Time | to improve the accuracy of a | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Learned a lot from this class. Helped my have a much better understanding of what a lot of companies are doing with machine learning technologies. Of course, there are a lot of practical know-hows that we can only gain from real world projects, and this class is well worth the time that I have put in. | this class is well worth the | Time | that I have put in. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is the first course i take from coursera. How excited i am. Though hurried through some part of the material due to limited time I learned a lot. Lot of thanks to professor 吴恩达。Time for me to pick up another course | of the material due to limited | Time | I learned a lot. Lot of | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is simply amazing, all the content from the video lessons, through the quizzes and the programming exercises are really well done, and also, there are really good mentors helping on the Discussion areas. If one with the will to really dive into these complex things to extract knowledge, I assure you, you will. The course is well made, but doesn't mean it's easy. I questioned myself through a lot of times in the beginning if I really was capable of learning all of this stuff. But I didn't give up, and well, this might be one of the most important decisions I've made in my life. This course aroused in me the passion to carry this knowledge, and keep improving it through my career. | questioned myself through a lot of | Time | in the beginning if I really | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It was so useful and interesting course! It was the first time to take the online course and it helps me a lot. | interesting course! It was the first | Time | to take the online course and | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you!!! It was very interesting and it was worth the spent time. It may be slightly better if it would use R language instead of Octave. But this is only my opinion. Thank you so much!!! | and it was worth the spent | Time | It may be slightly better if | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is worthwhile to spend your time and energy on this course if you're interested in this field. Prof. Ng has prepared many materials, including application cases in Silicon Valley, to illustrate the essence of machine learning. During the lectures, he was stick to the basic optimization concept, to minimize the cost function under constraints, which could answer many theoretic questions posed by beginners. | It is worthwhile to spend your | Time | and energy on this course if | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a survey course in Machine Learning which isn't afraid to get seriously in-depth with the detailed math and coding techniques underlying popular ML topics like logistic regression, neural networks, and SVMs. Andrew Ng also spends considerable time on applications and methods for determining if your learner is robust. It is a very challenging course, both conceptually and with the assignments. The assignments are very difficult and will require considerable time and effort. Previous experience with Matlab/Octave is helpful. In terms of math, I think at least one course in Linear Algebra should be prerequisite as the use of vector and matrix operations abound in this class. A good understanding of the programming concept of vectorization is also very helpful...if you don't already understand it...you will after you get through this course. A special thanks to Tom Mosher, one of the class mentors....his help and advice was very helpful in completing the course. | SVMs. Andrew Ng also spends considerable | Time | on applications and methods for determining | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a survey course in Machine Learning which isn't afraid to get seriously in-depth with the detailed math and coding techniques underlying popular ML topics like logistic regression, neural networks, and SVMs. Andrew Ng also spends considerable time on applications and methods for determining if your learner is robust. It is a very challenging course, both conceptually and with the assignments. The assignments are very difficult and will require considerable time and effort. Previous experience with Matlab/Octave is helpful. In terms of math, I think at least one course in Linear Algebra should be prerequisite as the use of vector and matrix operations abound in this class. A good understanding of the programming concept of vectorization is also very helpful...if you don't already understand it...you will after you get through this course. A special thanks to Tom Mosher, one of the class mentors....his help and advice was very helpful in completing the course. | very difficult and will require considerable | Time | and effort. Previous experience with Matlab/Octave | Positive | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great overall experience. The lectures are top notch. The section on backward propagation in neural nets was particularly well done. You spend most of the homeworks getting Octave implementations to work based on provided scaffolding code. This is a good method, but it does mean that you spend time with few examples than you might expect, as you must write the implementations at a fairly low level. The upside is that you end up with a deeper understanding of the methods than you might get from, say, using high-level commands in R. Thank you mister Ng for making this great opportunity to learn machine learning for free. | it does mean that you spend | Time | with few examples than you might | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | For starters in Machine learning, this course serves as good foundation. It might not be easier to get understanding but its total worth of time if you are interested in machine learning. | understanding but its total worth of | Time | if you are interested in machine | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course! The best one you can find on the web. Hands on with plenty of practical applications. Lots of work on the part of Dr Ng and his staff. I only wish Dr Ng followed a book with more detailed information on the different topics and additional ones we could refer to if we needed to. Maybe its time for him to write one. Thanks again. | if we needed to. Maybe its | Time | for him to write one. Thanks | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great overview of Machine Learning. I've learnt a lot, so why not 5 stars? I put more time than advertised especially in solving practical assignments with Octave, but it's certainly because of my lack of math background. | not 5 stars? I put more | Time | than advertised especially in solving practical | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really great course. The lectures were instructive and detailed without wasting time. The quizes tested well that you understood the material, and the assignments made you learn not just how to do machine learning but how to do it well and intelligently. I can't imagine a better way to learn Machine Learning than with this course. The only potential negative is that those of us like me who started this course being terrible at matlab/octave have to become competent in it to succeed. I highly recommend this course to anybody who wants to learn Machine Learning. There isn't a better resource out there. | were instructive and detailed without wasting | Time | The quizes tested well that you | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I just thought it would be harder. But then again, maybe I wouldn't have enough time to learn it. It's great. | again, maybe I wouldn't have enough | Time | to learn it. It's great. | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I never tought I would learn so much in so little time. Also Andrew Ng is an awesome teacher. | learn so much in so little | Time | Also Andrew Ng is an awesome | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am week 9 of current course but I already feel so good about the subject. The content covered by Professor and the ease with which he has gone over such complex subjects is beyond commendable. I thoroughly enjoyed the course. I just want Professor Ng to consider another advanced course which covers topics which he hasn't covered in this one, in detail, due to time and audience constraints. Also, there should be an option to get the certificate at the end of the course too, like, in my case, I wasn't sure if I will be able to follow deadlines due to work schedule but now at almost end of it, I feel like I should have opted for it. All in all, thank you so much! | this one, in detail, due to | Time | and audience constraints. Also, there should | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng is literally the best teacher I have ever known. He makes the whole course comprehensible even for a foreigner and newbie like me. Also, the discussions's assistants are extremely dedicated to help. I remember that I was stuck at my first time using MatLab, but as the discussion has the tutorial of the first programming assignment, I now understand vector and matrix multiplication that I have never ever confronted before. I'm 100% looking forward to finishing this course perfectly. | I was stuck at my first | Time | using MatLab, but as the discussion | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a wonderful course and I have learned a lot from it. It deserves its fame. However, I would suggest that it would be great if Coursera could spend some time editing the video because there are several places where Andrew explicitly indicates editing. | great if Coursera could spend some | Time | editing the video because there are | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course provides a very structured introduction to the subject of Machine Learning. Every week includes programming assignments in MATLAB/Octave. These come with templates and precise instructions. With a little experience in any programming language the assignments should be no problem. The assignments are well planned to keep the motivation up. Really great job! Learners should be familiar with vectors and matrices. Even though all the concepts are explained, being confident with the math will shorten the time for debugging the code immensely. The course team answers technical and other questions VERY quickly. Thanks again! | with the math will shorten the | Time | for debugging the code immensely. The | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Worth the time spent. Enjoyed it totally :) | Worth the | Time | spent. Enjoyed it totally :) | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. Very efficient use of time. | Excellent course. Very efficient use of | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent course! It is the second time I take this course and it is getting better with each session. The material is explained very clearly and the concepts are easy to understand. The exercises are challenging and really make you think. All the necessary programs are provided and all you need is the will to learn. Kudos and a big thank you to the professor and to his excellent team! | excellent course! It is the second | Time | I take this course and it | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Loved it! Every lesson was a challenge and every accomplishment was a victory! Thanks for your time preparing this course! | was a victory! Thanks for your | Time | preparing this course! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course talking about the fundamentals of machine learning. Definitely worth the time and effort. I would have given it a 5 if it had any information on how to handle non numerical data like categorical or text features. | of machine learning. Definitely worth the | Time | and effort. I would have given | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really like the way the course has been structured. I am actually learning something totally new without spending lot of time. | totally new without spending lot of | Time | | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| 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. | model/design. This is frustratingly apparent at | Time | Some information can be difficult to | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good course to learn machine learning, and this is the second time to learn this course. | learning, and this is the second | Time | to learn this course. | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is an excellent class. I already took it but it worth to refresh again since the concept also needs more time to consume. | since the concept also needs more | Time | to consume. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Fantastic class!! Very engaging and practical. The instructor is easy to understand and takes you through the course with simple narratives but very technical at the same time. I wish the course will link up graduates with ongoing projects for cementing the knowledge. | but very technical at the same | Time | I wish the course will link | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Wonderful course, I really enjoyed it , it is well build, one of the best teachers i encountered, well worth investing your time. | i encountered, well worth investing your | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Brilliant course! It offers a deep understanding of the subject in a delicate balance between working with the guts of the machine learning algorithms and getting the general picture. Don't begin working on a machine learning project before watching week 6. Or maybe you should, it definitely sinks in more after you've had a go at wasting your time :) | had a go at wasting your | Time | :) | Negative | 1.0 | 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. | in a fairly short period of | Time | so it is understandable (and most | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course, with awesome instructor and TAs. I spent a lot of time on it and learned a lot. Thank you for bring this course to me! | TAs. I spent a lot of | Time | on it and learned a lot. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course! Well worth the time. Opens so many possibilities and springs so many new ideas! Andrew is a great instructor explaining very complex concepts in extremely simple way. One thing I would probably add to the course is something about existing platforms/software for machine learning. It is a bit more on the practical side for the people who will choose not to code the algorithms by themselves but would prefer to use existing solutions. Thank you very much. I also think that thousands of students passing this course every semester is a great tribute to coursera. I am a CEO of a tech company in China and while I could access some of the best education resources financially, I can not afford to do that because of lack of time. Coursera is a great platform that gives me that access. I think for people like me it could also be great to open up some possibility to contribute back to coursera in some way. | Amazing course! Well worth the | Time | Opens so many possibilities and springs | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course! Well worth the time. Opens so many possibilities and springs so many new ideas! Andrew is a great instructor explaining very complex concepts in extremely simple way. One thing I would probably add to the course is something about existing platforms/software for machine learning. It is a bit more on the practical side for the people who will choose not to code the algorithms by themselves but would prefer to use existing solutions. Thank you very much. I also think that thousands of students passing this course every semester is a great tribute to coursera. I am a CEO of a tech company in China and while I could access some of the best education resources financially, I can not afford to do that because of lack of time. Coursera is a great platform that gives me that access. I think for people like me it could also be great to open up some possibility to contribute back to coursera in some way. | do that because of lack of | Time | Coursera is a great platform that | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really well taught for a course at this level of complexity. The instructor is very down to Earth, and he connects concepts in a way that brings out the full picture. If you pay attention and invest the time, by the end of the course you can expect to have a solid road map for approaching machine learning problems on your own data sets. | you pay attention and invest the | Time | by the end of the course | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | using for-loops. I was wowed several | Time | Prof. Andrew Ng is a great | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | completely now. It also took me | Time | to figure this out. " This | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Overall this is a really great course. My small criticism: Sometimes I wished for more optional videos containing proofs of the formulas. I often spent all the time watching the videos wondering how we would solve some problem only to be presented with a formula without any explanation where it came from. This is only a small problem because the answer was usually not too hard to find and often even linked in the discussion, but if this information were contained in the course content (e.g. optional videos assuming some linear algebra background), it would be even better. | formulas. I often spent all the | Time | watching the videos wondering how we | Negative | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was amazing. The clarity of explanation of concepts along with the suggested tips and tricks the professor provided made the time spent taking this course truly worth wild. | tricks the professor provided made the | Time | spent taking this course truly worth | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng is one of the best instructors I've ever had. He makes the difficult easy to follow and comprehend. His course is excellent and I hope he finds the time to choose another interesting topic to turn into a course. Thank You Professor Ng! | and I hope he finds the | Time | to choose another interesting topic to | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's been great time to learn machine learning with Professor Andrew Ng. This course can give you a general understanding of what is machine learning as well as how such technology can be used for somewhat closely related to our life. Thank you again! | It's been great | Time | to learn machine learning with Professor | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Probably the best course for an introduction on machine learning. I would recommend it to anyone that has a slight interest on this subject. The course itself is very enjoyable , the programming exercises are very self-motivating and worth the time. | are very self-motivating and worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's amazing that this course is offered for free. What a beautifully built course. Lots of time must have gone into preparing it. | a beautifully built course. Lots of | Time | must have gone into preparing it. | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Easy to understand without being to easy. Doable while having a full time job. | easy. Doable while having a full | Time | job. | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Well worth the time, not only is the lecturer very good at communicating the concepts, but he also has real-world experience, and it shows. | Well worth the | Time | not only is the lecturer very | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is really the best course I have seen so far. A lot of effort has been put into the material and exercise to quantum leap understanding of machine learning. Andrew Ng can be very very proud of this course. Hope he will find the time to maybe make a more advanced course as well. | course. Hope he will find the | Time | to maybe make a more advanced | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome instructor, and content. Tough course, but worth the time. | content. Tough course, but worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A great course for revolution in advance machine learning, I am attempting it 2nd time very useful content about Machine Learning and great teaching methodology | learning, I am attempting it 2nd | Time | very useful content about Machine Learning | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course opened my eyes on how valuable and structured information can be extracted from large datasets. In this course I learned: -What kind of problems can be solved with machine learning. -What kind of data is useful and how to get and prepare this data (+ Octave/Matlab implementation). -How machine learning algorithms work and how to implement them. And how to tune the parameters of the specific algorithm (+ Octave/Matlab implementation). -How to use different heuristics to evaluate the machine learning algorithms (+ Octave/Matlab implementation). -How to debug and optimize a machine learning system time efficiently (+ Octave/Matlab implementation). . | and optimize a machine learning system | Time | efficiently (+ Octave/Matlab implementation). . | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is long ago (25+ years) that I dealt with ANNs by that time. This course is terms of content and didactial concept very well built. I can only recommend it. In particular, as it is not only taking care of the theoretical background but also has a lot of good stuff for me as a practitioner. Thanks | I dealt with ANNs by that | Time | This course is terms of content | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | When you sense a passion about teaching over net, than you are 100% that you're on the right place, on the right time! :) | the right place, on the right | Time | :) | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My review concerns partially the course and partially the Coursera concept as this was my first on-line course and I cannot distinguish between those two.My experience was simply great, I felt that it was time well spend, for example compares to my company provided trainings and I'm hoping to return to another course.I have quite strong background in statistics so some parts were too basic for me but being able to speed the videos up is neat and it opens the course to wide spectrum of students (again opposed to company provided trainings or even school lessons where in the best case half of the students are bored of the slow tempo and other half isn't able to keep up with the same tempo). To have my own timeplan also helps but I even finished quite early as it was so fun.About the course contend: Andrew Ng prepared great lessons, all was pretty well explained (even when he cannot use some "advanced math" not to lose part of the students). The examples were illustrative as well as realistic (at least seemed realistic and that makes it more exciting than some artificial ones).I was little afraid of the programming exercises as I've never worked with Matlab (using mainly R). But now I'm glad that I know another language:) The system of submitting works perfectly.I can say similar thinks about the contend of the exercises as I wrote about examples in lectures. It is nice to program my own spam filter - the concept of programming only some small parts of the program and not to have to deal with data loading, plotting... is again very entertaining and instructive and then it can be done some nice application in short time.My thanks to the whole Coursera team and of course Andrew Ng. Hope to use this cool tools in my work. Zdeněk | great, I felt that it was | Time | well spend, for example compares to | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | My review concerns partially the course and partially the Coursera concept as this was my first on-line course and I cannot distinguish between those two.My experience was simply great, I felt that it was time well spend, for example compares to my company provided trainings and I'm hoping to return to another course.I have quite strong background in statistics so some parts were too basic for me but being able to speed the videos up is neat and it opens the course to wide spectrum of students (again opposed to company provided trainings or even school lessons where in the best case half of the students are bored of the slow tempo and other half isn't able to keep up with the same tempo). To have my own timeplan also helps but I even finished quite early as it was so fun.About the course contend: Andrew Ng prepared great lessons, all was pretty well explained (even when he cannot use some "advanced math" not to lose part of the students). The examples were illustrative as well as realistic (at least seemed realistic and that makes it more exciting than some artificial ones).I was little afraid of the programming exercises as I've never worked with Matlab (using mainly R). But now I'm glad that I know another language:) The system of submitting works perfectly.I can say similar thinks about the contend of the exercises as I wrote about examples in lectures. It is nice to program my own spam filter - the concept of programming only some small parts of the program and not to have to deal with data loading, plotting... is again very entertaining and instructive and then it can be done some nice application in short time.My thanks to the whole Coursera team and of course Andrew Ng. Hope to use this cool tools in my work. Zdeněk | done some nice application in short | Time | My thanks to the whole Coursera | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This felt like a great introduction to the algorithms being used today by the top companies and academics. Very relevant course! This was not meant to be a thorough course, and some of the math was glossed over, but just enough was given so that I feel comfortable going further into any topic. This course can definitely take some time to complete, but anyone with some programming experience who's had exposure to linear algebra should be fine understanding what's happening. | This course can definitely take some | Time | to complete, but anyone with some | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent explanations and proper and useful assignments given at the right time to implement the algorithms in practice immediately after theory material. | useful assignments given at the right | Time | to implement the algorithms in practice | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a really excellent course. I've learned various topics of machine learning including a fundamental algorithm to train models and predict cases and some practical tips like dealing with overfitting. Especially, programming assignments gave me a lot of intuition and understanding, that is helpful though it took some time to finish all of them. Thank Andrew Ng very much for the wonderful experience! | is helpful though it took some | Time | to finish all of them. Thank | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I thoroughly enjoyed taking part in this course. Although it took a significant amount of time to work through, I feel that all of the work was well worth it. My understanding of the basics of machine learning now places me in a position far beyond that which I could have imagined being in. My thanks to the the author of the course, Andrew Ng for all of the work which he put into this course. It is appreciated by many. I am at the beginning of an academic career in computational neuroscience and artificial intelligence and I have no doubt that the lessons from this course will guide me time and time again. | it took a significant amount of | Time | to work through, I feel that | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I thoroughly enjoyed taking part in this course. Although it took a significant amount of time to work through, I feel that all of the work was well worth it. My understanding of the basics of machine learning now places me in a position far beyond that which I could have imagined being in. My thanks to the the author of the course, Andrew Ng for all of the work which he put into this course. It is appreciated by many. I am at the beginning of an academic career in computational neuroscience and artificial intelligence and I have no doubt that the lessons from this course will guide me time and time again. | from this course will guide me | Time | and time again. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I thoroughly enjoyed taking part in this course. Although it took a significant amount of time to work through, I feel that all of the work was well worth it. My understanding of the basics of machine learning now places me in a position far beyond that which I could have imagined being in. My thanks to the the author of the course, Andrew Ng for all of the work which he put into this course. It is appreciated by many. I am at the beginning of an academic career in computational neuroscience and artificial intelligence and I have no doubt that the lessons from this course will guide me time and time again. | course will guide me time and | Time | again. | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really cool course, Andrew Ng is a great teacher with an outstanding knowledge. I particularly loved when he said things like "I used string kernels just twice in my life, this other kernel maybe 5 or 6 times" because he was giving us a clear, practical measure of how/how much we were going to use it. I think that's what makes a teacher (and subsequently the course) great, mixing a really good theorical knowledge with years of in-the-field experience. I hope i'll be able to talk to him sometimes because he's a very bright person. Also congrats to the mentors working hard to mantain the course. | other kernel maybe 5 or 6 | Time | because he was giving us a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is really good. I got the opportunity to learn the concepts theoritically and also apply them to real time problems. So I now have an in-depth understanding of all concepts. | and also apply them to real | Time | problems. So I now have an | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Epic class on machine learning. One of the best and most inspiring MOOC's I've followed. Do the programming exercises. They are well worth the time and effort. | exercises. They are well worth the | Time | and effort. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I'm currently finishing up week 8 of 11. Ng is a great lecturer, and the course is really well developed and interesting. The first week feels a bit slow, but stick with it and you'll get into some neat math and good algorithmic thinking. The ability to visualize vector and matrix operations will help out a lot, but now is as good a time to learn as ever! | but now is as good a | Time | to learn as ever! | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The Good: This course is a good introduction to fundamental topics and basic techniques in machine learning. I feel that the biggest strength of this course comes from Prof. Ng's suggestions for how to design and improve machine learning systems in practice. The Bad: This course is a few years old, and there are a lot of errors in the videos and even occasionally in the programming exercises as well. In my opinion, there is a little too much hand-holding in the programming exercises, so that while I was able to implement the important bits and pieces of the algorithms, I didn't get much chance to practice the more difficult task of organizing the entire system. The Ambiguous: This course is *very* light on the math, perhaps as light as you could possibly get. I imagine this is a relief for a lot of people, but personally I felt annoyed and even a little patronized with the number of times Prof. Ng said that we "don't have to worry" about the mathematical details of different concepts and algorithms. It's fine to skip over derivations and details for the sake of a simple presentation or to emphasize practical application, but surely it is important to go back and see what all this stuff means eventually. I will certainly be looking for other courses on machine learning that give a more mathematical treatment, and I think that anyone who wants to seriously get into ML should probably do the same. On a related note, Prof. Ng takes his time in each video, speaking slowly, repeating different points, and carefully explicating formulas with examples. For some people that may be good, but I found myself frequently skipping ahead in videos because I just wanted to get to the point. | little patronized with the number of | Time | Prof. Ng said that we " | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The Good: This course is a good introduction to fundamental topics and basic techniques in machine learning. I feel that the biggest strength of this course comes from Prof. Ng's suggestions for how to design and improve machine learning systems in practice. The Bad: This course is a few years old, and there are a lot of errors in the videos and even occasionally in the programming exercises as well. In my opinion, there is a little too much hand-holding in the programming exercises, so that while I was able to implement the important bits and pieces of the algorithms, I didn't get much chance to practice the more difficult task of organizing the entire system. The Ambiguous: This course is *very* light on the math, perhaps as light as you could possibly get. I imagine this is a relief for a lot of people, but personally I felt annoyed and even a little patronized with the number of times Prof. Ng said that we "don't have to worry" about the mathematical details of different concepts and algorithms. It's fine to skip over derivations and details for the sake of a simple presentation or to emphasize practical application, but surely it is important to go back and see what all this stuff means eventually. I will certainly be looking for other courses on machine learning that give a more mathematical treatment, and I think that anyone who wants to seriously get into ML should probably do the same. On a related note, Prof. Ng takes his time in each video, speaking slowly, repeating different points, and carefully explicating formulas with examples. For some people that may be good, but I found myself frequently skipping ahead in videos because I just wanted to get to the point. | related note, Prof. Ng takes his | Time | in each video, speaking slowly, repeating | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| GukyRC_jEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Exceptional. The information is relevant, the topics presented well and the additional reference articles interesting. I suppose I should have taken the time to retake the tests to get 100% but who has time? Thank you! | suppose I should have taken the | Time | to retake the tests to get | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| GukyRC_jEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Exceptional. The information is relevant, the topics presented well and the additional reference articles interesting. I suppose I should have taken the time to retake the tests to get 100% but who has time? Thank you! | to get 100% but who has | Time | Thank you! | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| GukyRC_jEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Very informative but at times too technical | Very informative but at | Time | too technical | Positive | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | Appreciate the time spent by the authors to prepare all the course materials and the assignments. Everything clear and relatively self-contained. However, I still do not feel to be an expert in parallelism. | Appreciate the | Time | spent by the authors to prepare | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | I feel the concepts which are necessary to use in programming assignments are not discussed in the lectures enough. As result figuring out what the assignment steps are all about takes too much time. Some tasks are absolutely trivial, and others are simply too difficult. | are all about takes too much | Time | Some tasks are absolutely trivial, and | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | Really a great course but with a heavy work for the duration. If others courses are followed in parallel, there's no time to loose | are followed in parallel, there's no | Time | to loose | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | The course was well covered and very informative. As someone with zero experience in parallelism, I felt I could've absorbed a lot more if the topics were not completely new to me. As mentioned in other reviews, the last assignment, Barnes Hut Simulation, was very time consuming and I found myself spending more time trying to understand the problem rather than implementing it. That was very challenging for someone with low academic background. | assignment, Barnes Hut Simulation, was very | Time | consuming and I found myself spending | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | The course was well covered and very informative. As someone with zero experience in parallelism, I felt I could've absorbed a lot more if the topics were not completely new to me. As mentioned in other reviews, the last assignment, Barnes Hut Simulation, was very time consuming and I found myself spending more time trying to understand the problem rather than implementing it. That was very challenging for someone with low academic background. | and I found myself spending more | Time | trying to understand the problem rather | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | The course achieves its objectives, but the assignments require too much effort for solving general problems, and relatively little for parallelism-related tasks. In other words, understanding what the problem is takes far more time than solving it. The Lego-assisted teaching is a definite plus though! | the problem is takes far more | Time | than solving it. The Lego-assisted teaching | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | The course presents two core approaches to parallel programming - task and data parallelism. While these concepts are really useful, I expected more details on, for example, how to implement the _parallel_ construct used throughout the lectures. The materials were good and I can use some of the ideas straight after the lectures in my everyday coding, but the assignments were really slightly related to the topic. Barnes Hut simulation assignment. I'd say it has nothing in common with parallel programming in Scala. It looks like the authors looked for some real-life example or use case for Combiners and this simulation model looked nice. But, really, does any developer not working in university would ever use it? It's completely impractical, the most of the time I spent reading the description of simulation model, but the coding itself was just playing with 2D coordinates and some basic recursion. I'd expect something more practical, e.g. implementing simplified form of Hadoop map-reduce or something like that so I can use it after the course. But Barnes-Hut is too specific and is pretty far from everyday problems developers encounter. | completely impractical, the most of the | Time | I spent reading the description of | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| GVy8tIIKEeWXmQ4F86nmrw | Excellent lectures, let down by the difficulty of the assignments. While the tutors clearly know their stuff, I found the assignments really quite challenging and of limited educational value due to the mixture of new concepts introduced by the lectures along with new (to me) mathematics or CS that also needed to be grasped. I'm an experienced professional programmer with the EPFL 'FP in Scala' and FRP courses under my belt, so I thought I knew what to expect but this was much more time consuming than I'd thought. | expect but this was much more | Time | consuming than I'd thought. | Negative | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| Gyll8Zh9EeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | Awesome, you will learn a lot about how DNA assemblers work, but very challenging and time demand in, especially if your background is in life science and not computer science. | assemblers work, but very challenging and | Time | demand in, especially if your background | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Gyll8Zh9EeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | The subject of the course is very interesting. Lectures are very engaging and professors do a great job explaining abstract concepts. On the other hand, assignments are extremely difficult and frustrating. The lack of feedback for the assignments leaves you with important knowledge gaps and that's a serious flaw for a course that offers so much most of the time. | offers so much most of the | Time | | Positive | 0.64 | 3.0 |
| gZ6cbKKkEeW1Bw7HN8tFsw | Interesting overview. Would have appreciated more time on Hellenistic Philosophy | Interesting overview. Would have appreciated more | Time | on Hellenistic Philosophy | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| gZ6cbKKkEeW1Bw7HN8tFsw | Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana | | Time | flies like an arrow. Fruit flies | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Great topic with a great instructor. Only wish the program was a little longer to spend some more time on some of the models. | little longer to spend some more | Time | on some of the models. | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The quizes do not match a 100% with the lecture videos. There are some weird questions. My algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some times, which is due to different software versions. Quizes are not very educating this time. Courses by Brian Caffo were much better. | algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some | Time | which is due to different software | Positive | 0.79 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The quizes do not match a 100% with the lecture videos. There are some weird questions. My algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some times, which is due to different software versions. Quizes are not very educating this time. Courses by Brian Caffo were much better. | Quizes are not very educating this | Time | Courses by Brian Caffo were much | Negative | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Good introduction to machine learning, might suffer a bit from trying to cover too much ground in such a short time. | much ground in such a short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Absolutely useless random un-explained list of facts and advices that is thrown to a learner without any attempt to give a systematic approach. Pure waste of time and effort. Can only be suitable to those, who already know the subject well and can use some additional facts that are randomly presented in this "course". | a systematic approach. Pure waste of | Time | and effort. Can only be suitable | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Really good class. I think there were some small issues with the class project. Like all real world problems it was not entirely well specified and the data was a bit odd to use for a prediction exercise because it was time series data. | a prediction exercise because it was | Time | series data. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Had big expectations for this one... really one of the ones to look forward to after working through the beginning of the specialization, but for some reason, it seemed any prof or even TA interaction was absent this time around like in none of the other specialization coursed to date. Bugs in the new interface and quizzes weren't really addressed. Couldn't even get an official response about the apparent removal of Distinction-level now (which I'd been working to get in all specialization courses and now seems no longer an option). Still interesting content. As a "free" course, it's still really valuable. As one of the people that paid for this and all others in this specialization, this is the one I felt didn't return as much value to justify the payment with no "official" course staff seeming to be involved this round. | even TA interaction was absent this | Time | around like in none of the | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Does not give much intuition around the subject. I found the lectures a bit uninspiring. Lots of powerpoint (just text, no images or visuals really) and the lecturer just underlined the words he was talking about as he read the powerpoint out. I found the Udacity Intro to Machine Learning course gave a much better intuition and understanding of this subject. We also had slides on how to split data into a training and testing set on pretty much EVERY lecture - what a waste of time! | lecture - what a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | they have been for quite some | Time | Here are some specific comments: 1. | Negative | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | have been giving for quite some | Time | with perhaps a few new ones | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | recommend that you put a little | Time | and effort into writing all new | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | recommend that you put a little | Time | and effort into finding a new | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | good professors put a lot of | Time | and effort into creating what are | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | that these class materials took considerable | Time | and efforts to create. I wish | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| H10rxZj0EeW5gxKDBxYMJw | This course was incredible! The videos were interesting and included field trips and dialogue that made it spectacular and enjoyable to learn. You were able to take every graded assignment and participate even if you did not have money to buy the certificate. I learned so much and feel like my mind has been widened. I wish it had talked a bit more about how humans are evolving because that was super interesting, and a few test items would not grade correctly, but other than that it was perfect! Thank you so much for providing this excellent course for free for us! It must of took so much time and collaborative effort I applaud you for your generosity. It makes me wish I could go to this school. | It must of took so much | Time | and collaborative effort I applaud you | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | Awesome lecture. I wish the lectures at my University would have been as good as this. Then I think I would have a much better and more interesting time and I`d learned a lot more. Thanks for all your work!! Best wishes form Switzerland! | a much better and more interesting | Time | and I`d learned a lot more. | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | While the course was overall well developed, there are certain language challenges to overcome especially with understanding the wording of quizzes. I got a number of questions wrong simply because I could not understand the phrasing, and lack of explanations on quizzes makes for a lot of difficulty to evaluate progress. And I get the reason for not including answer explanations, at the same time I'm literally comparing answers to the module transcripts and could not possibly infer multiple choice answers based off how the topic was explained. I would suggest more definitive questions and reduce multiple choice questions or at least define the question in a more narrow, specified manner to minimize confusion. I'm taking this course for fun, I have an MBA and love strategy, so the topics are not new by any means, but if I can't understand what you're trying to say I would imagine non-business backgrounds would find the questions very difficult. | including answer explanations, at the same | Time | I'm literally comparing answers to the | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | There is always something that you never know when you can use them. However, things really happen all the time. Knowing something is really helpful. That's why I would highly recommand this course to non-psy major students. | However, things really happen all the | Time | Knowing something is really helpful. That's | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | As a Child Protective Services Caseworker, I work with a variety of families who experience psychological crises at various times. The course helped me learn a bit more about how to help my families when they are in need. | who experience psychological crises at various | Time | The course helped me learn a | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | The PowerPoint slides are informative yet lengthy and boring at times. I hope Coursera can do something to make the lecture more interactive and less monotonous. | informative yet lengthy and boring at | Time | I hope Coursera can do something | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| hbvvfJLaEeWBSw79YYA_8Q | Amazing course! Exactly what I expected, and more. Thank you for take the time to create a good and understandable course in an engaging way. If you are thinking to make another specialized on this, count me in! I look forward to hear about new courses from Johns Hopkins University. Thank you! Armando | more. Thank you for take the | Time | to create a good and understandable | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | So far so good! I like the way the lectures and quizzes are presented. I am loving the instructor and his style. However, I have to go through the whole course before I could say how productive the course will be. Anyway, thanks a lot for the team! Thanks a lot Nick Sanots, Coursera, UC Davis and all fellow learners. I was a week late and could not complete the final assignment in time. However, the course is great! The course is medium paced, and best even for newcomers and intermediates alike. The chapters presented in the course are very productive and vivid. I simply love the course. I don't feel there is any room for improvement. Its just perfect! I love this course. Looking forward for next session of this course and next course. | not complete the final assignment in | Time | However, the course is great! The | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Essential for anyone interested in GIS and wants to get the basics. I really learnt a lot in a short space of time at my own pace. Brilliant convenor. | lot in a short space of | Time | at my own pace. Brilliant convenor. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Very well presented. Unfortunately I think the order was a bit strange. We focused on data analysis instead of basics of data generation. In an introductory course I would have liked to see a bit more what different data looks like. Vectors, rasters, etc. Some of us live and work in countries that don't have a lot of data (I'm a South African and I work in Malaysia... California, the Karroo, and Borneo have different amounts of information available). We're not learning GIS to analyse data because we don't have much data available. We're building the data... We spent too much time on rivers/watersheds. I get that hydrology is Nick's field but some us will work with cities, or population, or roads, planning farmlands - a bit of variety would be nice. The data should not be available off the Coursera page - we should have to get it off the internet so we get familiar with public data resources. The websites should have the broadest data - good regardless of what country you're in. | . . We spent too much | Time | on rivers/watersheds. I get that hydrology | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | i did not completed this course on time because of slow internet speed in my locality. I will be obliged if they give me more time to complete this course. | did not completed this course on | Time | because of slow internet speed in | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | i did not completed this course on time because of slow internet speed in my locality. I will be obliged if they give me more time to complete this course. | obliged if they give me more | Time | to complete this course. | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am an Architect-Planner by profession. Was looking for this course for quite sometime. I finally found it on Coursera. I had a great time learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had never before worked in Gis though I had a very little theoretical idea. But, at the end of this course, I was able to analyse and make my own map, something I had never done before with GIS. The lectures were to the point, with most of the details covered. The assignments for practice were very helpful too. This course comes with a very helpful reading materiaI and a year long licensed version of ArcGIS too. I had a great time in taking up the quizes, and the peer reviewed final assignment. I highly recommend this course. Last but not the least, thank you Nick Santos for teaching so well! got back to class almost after 8 years and had a great time! I am sure that this will help me taking up further studies in my field. | on Coursera. I had a great | Time | learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am an Architect-Planner by profession. Was looking for this course for quite sometime. I finally found it on Coursera. I had a great time learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had never before worked in Gis though I had a very little theoretical idea. But, at the end of this course, I was able to analyse and make my own map, something I had never done before with GIS. The lectures were to the point, with most of the details covered. The assignments for practice were very helpful too. This course comes with a very helpful reading materiaI and a year long licensed version of ArcGIS too. I had a great time in taking up the quizes, and the peer reviewed final assignment. I highly recommend this course. Last but not the least, thank you Nick Santos for teaching so well! got back to class almost after 8 years and had a great time! I am sure that this will help me taking up further studies in my field. | ArcGIS too. I had a great | Time | in taking up the quizes, and | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am an Architect-Planner by profession. Was looking for this course for quite sometime. I finally found it on Coursera. I had a great time learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had never before worked in Gis though I had a very little theoretical idea. But, at the end of this course, I was able to analyse and make my own map, something I had never done before with GIS. The lectures were to the point, with most of the details covered. The assignments for practice were very helpful too. This course comes with a very helpful reading materiaI and a year long licensed version of ArcGIS too. I had a great time in taking up the quizes, and the peer reviewed final assignment. I highly recommend this course. Last but not the least, thank you Nick Santos for teaching so well! got back to class almost after 8 years and had a great time! I am sure that this will help me taking up further studies in my field. | 8 years and had a great | Time | I am sure that this will | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | A good introduction to GIS focusing on the fundamental principles with a good practical element included. There is a lot to take in over four weeks so it does require plenty of time to absorb all the required learning and complete the assignment. Plenty of information and resources are provided and the lectures are clear and easily to follow. The only criticism I would have is that there is probably too much emphasis on Arc GIS, it would have been nice to learn some more about open source platforms like QGIS. | so it does require plenty of | Time | to absorb all the required learning | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am enjoying real time learning at my convenient time | I am enjoying real | Time | learning at my convenient time | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am enjoying real time learning at my convenient time | real time learning at my convenient | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Very smooth and fluid introduction to the basics of the GIS field and ArcGIS software. Feel like I developed good working knowledge in a very short time. Excited to go into more depth in future courses! | working knowledge in a very short | Time | Excited to go into more depth | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I'm only done with week 1 of this course 'Fundamentals of GIS' and I divided the work load into two evenings. I'm a full time master student, but this way of learning is really great in combination with full-time work, study etc. Even tho it's rather late right now and I'm tired, I'm really considering to take a few more modules. The structure and the content is so exciting and really drags me into the world of GIS. The lecturer Nick Santos is really good, the pace is perfect and you are always able to go back to previous videos, documents or search the internet, ask your fellow students or the professor if something is bothering you or if you are just curious. I HIGHLY recommend this course and the specialisation aswell. | into two evenings. I'm a full | Time | master student, but this way of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Very structured and organize Course , You will have a great time learning with Nick Santos ! | , You will have a great | Time | learning with Nick Santos ! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Great course with engaging material and enthusiastic and experienced instruction. The materials, lectures, assignments, extras, links, etc. were excellent. Only two negative aspects occurred. The first was the initial lack of materials with which to follow the instructors as they went through various processes in ArcMap in their lectures. However, this was remedied quickly and materials were provided. The second was the instructional material for the week 2 assignment, which lacked the step-by-step detail and polish of the assignments from other weeks. This may have been due to the course being new and somewhat unrefined. Overall, the course was extremely helpful and well worth the time and money. I intend to continue on and complete the entire specialization. | extremely helpful and well worth the | Time | and money. I intend to continue | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| 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. | cover the topics superficially due to | Time | constraints. In the same way, the | Positive | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| 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. | some features). That would require more | Time | but it would also provide more | Negative | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| HFhDw-STEeWYOBIRup69HQ | Coming out from two very good predecessors (C3, parts 1&2), this course is somewhat a disappointment. The contents are too broad without real focused depth, and too much time spent on background info in almost all lectures. There ought to be more hands-on practices, and the assessments should be more challenging towards understanding, rather than matching terms. | real focused depth, and too much | Time | spent on background info in almost | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| hgw1Nkd5EeW8cBKtDAegYw | Really good for someone who is working with sensor, actuator, bread board for first time. | sensor, actuator, bread board for first | Time | | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| hgw1Nkd5EeW8cBKtDAegYw | As have the first two been, this course is also spectacularly well done. By this time I can almost think things through without going to the books. Almost, but not quite. This series of courses is really amazing. A wonderful entry to the Internet of Things. Thank you. | also spectacularly well done. By this | Time | I can almost think things through | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| hHc_5i-9EeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Very good course in entrepreneurship, giving good theoretical and practical insights at the same time! | and practical insights at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| hhFDsQ72EeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | I thought the course admirably fulfilled my expectations for a general introduction to Game Theory. It kept maths to a minimum and the explanations were clear and always backed up by examples. Seeed to be very little forum activity, don't know why... maybe that's just says soething about the sort of people who want to learn about Game Theory! It's a good length with a good amount of time dedicated each week. Sometimes it was a bit challenging, but all round pretty good, I thought. | length with a good amount of | Time | dedicated each week. Sometimes it was | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course have been very thorough in explaining concepts, and providing examples with explanations to review. The pace is just right, and it has been easy to find time to follow along with the course material. I am finding that I am actually looking forward to each session. | it has been easy to find | Time | to follow along with the course | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very nice indeed. I learnt CSS this time. I can only say this that instead of teaching Jquery you can teach us in the same javascript syntax. | nice indeed. I learnt CSS this | Time | I can only say this that | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I liked the course a lot and learned the basics of html, css and javascript. My main suggestions for improvement would be to extend the course over 8 weeks and spend more time on each subject. I also believe that if we were asked to do an assignment per week (so 8), it would have pushed us to deepen our understanding of the subject matter. That said, I very much enjoyed the course. I also love coursera and the work of all schools that participate with them. Thank-you and keep up the excellent work and valued effort ! | over 8 weeks and spend more | Time | on each subject. I also believe | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Well worth the time. This is an introduction class that I can put to use | Well worth the | Time | This is an introduction class that | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Well presented content. It was a little bit weird for me to jump straight to jQuery and spending so little time on Javascript but it works out for the course. I would suggest a couple of more examples and explanation of general programming concepts with providing relevant pdf. Generally a very good and content-rich course. | to jQuery and spending so little | Time | on Javascript but it works out | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course was very well organized, but I felt there were big jumps between the lessons within the modules. I would follow fine up to parts 7 or 8 out of 9 or 10 total parts, and then I would be lost. I know there is quite a bit to HTML, CSS, and Javascript, and the professors did a great job to separate the components. For a beginner, I would have liked to spend a bit more time on HTML and CSS for full comprehension before delving into JS. | liked to spend a bit more | Time | on HTML and CSS for full | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | There were times I got lost on the explanations. However it is a great manner to begin | There were | Time | I got lost on the explanations. | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I've learned a good deal about coding in HTML, CSS and JavaScript through this course. My only complaints are that the lecturer often whizzed through typing portions of the code during his lecture that I had to use more time than my schedule allotted reviewing the video slowly, and that some topics in the test questions didn't match any portion of the lecture. | that I had to use more | Time | than my schedule allotted reviewing the | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have only done week one but I love the logical way this is taught. The instructors don't get in the way of the message! They know how to keep it simple in the beginning so that the basics come across clearly. I have taken courses like this before and I still learned something new. I am really looking forward to the next lessons. This class is a good investment of my time. I really appreciate the course and those who put it all together. | is a good investment of my | Time | I really appreciate the course and | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Html and CSS were excellent! I'm sure this is a great course for people with some coding background, but as a complete beginner to Javascript and coding, I found it nearly impossible to comprehend the 3rd and 4th weeks because we jumped in to Jquery without first getting to know Javascript. Yes - the quizzes were too easy - I passed all of them even when I wasn't understanding most of the material. I went over to CodeAcademy and Microsoft Virtual Academy to get a better foundation in JS, then came back and was able to understand a bit better. As for me, I am going to spend more time learning and practicing JS/JQ before moving on to the next course in this specialization. | I am going to spend more | Time | learning and practicing JS/JQ before moving | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Pretty good. I learned alot in a short of amount of time. | in a short of amount of | Time | | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Excellent review of the basics. If you are new to these topics great too, but spend the time to make sure you understand these fundamentals before moving on. | topics great too, but spend the | Time | to make sure you understand these | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very low level , im sorry but this cant be even considered a good intro to HTML,CSS im going to stop wasting my time watching this. no chllange in the assignments or questions , + more of an overview of the basics then the basics .. | im going to stop wasting my | Time | watching this. no chllange in the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good concise overview of the basic web design languages - this is a good jumping off point for people looking to get in to Web Design. Keep in mind though, this covers a very large amount of material in a short amount of time. If you don't have any familiarity with coding already, you will likely need to do a lot of outside research to fill in the gaps. | material in a short amount of | Time | If you don't have any familiarity | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This was a fantastic course! I really enjoyed the quizes after every video. It helped me stay focused during videos and provided a good mental break at times. | provided a good mental break at | Time | | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Too much time is dedicated to the very basics. It could have been shorter and more concise. I opted out of this course in favour of the one from the Hong Cong University, sorry =) | Too much | Time | is dedicated to the very basics. | Negative | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | In my subjective opinion there were a lot of time spended to explain some simple thing that probably could be easier to learn just doing more examples. Anyway it is very interesting and it seems you can teach us much more so I am waiting for the future courses. Thank's and see you soon! | opinion there were a lot of | Time | spended to explain some simple thing | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 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. | not to learn for the first | Time | There's too many gaps in the | Negative | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The University of London is amazing. As a person with severe anxiety who is also a full time student I don't have as much time as I would like to focus on these courses but this course was so well compartmentalized and polished that it was a great experience even for me. I really liked how the pace of the assignments is increasing in complexity at a very nice pace. As a person with anxiety peer reviewed assignments can be a very frustrating process people can be petty with peer reviewed assignments I can't convey to them my other learning disabilities. | anxiety who is also a full | Time | student I don't have as much | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The University of London is amazing. As a person with severe anxiety who is also a full time student I don't have as much time as I would like to focus on these courses but this course was so well compartmentalized and polished that it was a great experience even for me. I really liked how the pace of the assignments is increasing in complexity at a very nice pace. As a person with anxiety peer reviewed assignments can be a very frustrating process people can be petty with peer reviewed assignments I can't convey to them my other learning disabilities. | student I don't have as much | Time | as I would like to focus | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good intro to the subject and good mix of technologies, I enjoyed the time learning. Especially I did like the flexibility learning besides my Job. | mix of technologies, I enjoyed the | Time | learning. Especially I did like the | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Great video instructions. Had some tech issues on my end. Not really a good idea to try this on a chromebook if you are just getting started. If you know the work-arounds to make the assignments with a chromebook it's below your level. Still very much worth the time to watch the videos whether or not you are going to complete the work. | level. Still very much worth the | Time | to watch the videos whether or | Positive | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have followed 2 courses at the same time: this one and "HTML, CSS and Javascript". They are covering the similar topics but this class has fallen short on most of the subject. Lecture time is very little. Short videos, and few of them. Each video is mostly non-focused talking, very few examples and so you don't learn much. By comparison, the other class has a lot of videos, each video is much longer and goes into many examples. Time is spent on focusing on the things to learn, and you get a lot out of it. I am dropping out of this specialization and will follow the other one which I hope will bring good content (unfortunately the following classes are not from the same teacher but from the same university). The following classes from this specialization are from the same teacher, so I don't think things will improve much. | followed 2 courses at the same | Time | this one and " HTML, CSS | Positive | 0.85 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have followed 2 courses at the same time: this one and "HTML, CSS and Javascript". They are covering the similar topics but this class has fallen short on most of the subject. Lecture time is very little. Short videos, and few of them. Each video is mostly non-focused talking, very few examples and so you don't learn much. By comparison, the other class has a lot of videos, each video is much longer and goes into many examples. Time is spent on focusing on the things to learn, and you get a lot out of it. I am dropping out of this specialization and will follow the other one which I hope will bring good content (unfortunately the following classes are not from the same teacher but from the same university). The following classes from this specialization are from the same teacher, so I don't think things will improve much. | on most of the subject. Lecture | Time | is very little. Short videos, and | Negative | 0.69 | 2.0 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have followed 2 courses at the same time: this one and "HTML, CSS and Javascript". They are covering the similar topics but this class has fallen short on most of the subject. Lecture time is very little. Short videos, and few of them. Each video is mostly non-focused talking, very few examples and so you don't learn much. By comparison, the other class has a lot of videos, each video is much longer and goes into many examples. Time is spent on focusing on the things to learn, and you get a lot out of it. I am dropping out of this specialization and will follow the other one which I hope will bring good content (unfortunately the following classes are not from the same teacher but from the same university). The following classes from this specialization are from the same teacher, so I don't think things will improve much. | longer and goes into many examples. | Time | is spent on focusing on the | Negative | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| HIUPOchIEeSA1yIACye2oA | Really excellent activities and explanations and examples. I loved so much about it. The content was excellent, the time with students was excellent... Really great! This makes me want to visit New York! | it. The content was excellent, the | Time | with students was excellent. . . | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | In my opinion, it gets too technical and it is not a self contained course at all. Neither it is a beginner course for game theory. If someone is looking to understand the real basics of it, should take the Univeristy of Tokyo course. Some lessons were really abstract and I ended up looking for information in other websites to understand it. Another thing... I suppose the three lecturers are incredible good in their respective fields, but in the teaching part, Some Shoham's lessons were like listening to a robot. M. O Jackson is pretty clear in his explanations altough too technical, and Leyton Brown has a very clear way to teach, but I honestly got lost many times in the final exercises. | but I honestly got lost many | Time | in the final exercises. | Negative | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| hJ1Jl-fcEeWwMw6osrJBVw | The games needs to be explained in sufficient details. In addition, after a point in time, it became too technical. | In addition, after a point in | Time | it became too technical. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Hm73dlDLEeWeiwqPB940Pw | This course is just AMAZING! I am a composer and I found myself astonished of how much I was lacking, yet, the quizzes translations, man, are so bad, must of the time those where "Straight trough" translations that are complete meaningless on Spanish, it's like they simply used Google translate. You might think "it is not THAT bad", well there are sections that ask you to determine stability based on the length of the line... good luck with that (Spanish usually takes more words to write the same idea) | are so bad, must of the | Time | those where " Straight trough" translations | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| hmUA37FKEeS5liIACye34Q | I really enjoyed this course. It was full of resources, analysis, and history that together fueled my interest in international public health. I was especially grateful for Dr Perry's personal insights - taken from his longstanding work in public health around the world. I had to prep for the quizzes - they weren't easy and I had to put in time on my papers but my return on investment has been great. I'm very glad I took the course and I just signed up for my next public health Johns Hopkins U course through Coursera. | and I had to put in | Time | on my papers but my return | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| hpIHP7ubEeWFzg5riIt8qw | A good solid course which will improve the way you analyse problems and write advice about it. It does take more time than the announcement says. It took me about 4x8 hours, but it depends on how serious you take it of course. | about it. It does take more | Time | than the announcement says. It took | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Great course! It's fantastic the way that the professor explains calculus, his way to teach makes him one of the best professors I've ever had. And it's a course that doesn't take several hours of your time, it's simple and straight to the point. I'm really impressed by how they made such a well structured course for online students. I could really notice that people who worked producing this course really worked to make it the best as possible. I can't wait to start Calculus 2! Regards from Brazil! Thank you all from Ohio University. | doesn't take several hours of your | Time | it's simple and straight to the | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | the lectures are awsome... he is an extra ordinary teacher... i haven't any idea about limits even exam time @12 but i have the confidence now... :) | any idea about limits even exam | Time | @12 but i have the confidence | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | use simple words to explain complicated calulus, it is very wonderful. it is definitly worth your time. | wonderful. it is definitly worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The professor is great and I'm loving this course! I did have to use Khan Academy a couple of times so far but this is awesome. Good luck | use Khan Academy a couple of | Time | so far but this is awesome. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I think this course is great, I like everything about it, but I can't say the same about the quiz format, it is rigid and non-standard I gave up on the course many times because of this How do write Sqrt(5) for instance ? 5x must be 5*x or it is not acceptable. I am sorry, this is pretty bad | gave up on the course many | Time | because of this How do write | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I took this course a long time ago but I remember that my experience was overly good, the teacher demonstrates the ideas of Calculus in very creative and visible ways and simplifies as much as possible the somewhat complicated ideas of Calculus. I self used also Paul's online notes to accomplish Calculus but if you're not very much into reading and you prefer very simple and clear videos this is the course for you (although I can't guarantee that everybody will relate to the style of this teacher). | I took this course a long | Time | ago but I remember that my | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The professor's teaching was fun. But you need to rewatch many times if you do not understand. Once you get it, you will blame why you didn't understand it at the first place because it's so simple and you'll then agree with what every words the professor said. | But you need to rewatch many | Time | if you do not understand. Once | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Very fast-paced at times but very informative. He creates an enthusiastic learning process. | Very fast-paced at | Time | but very informative. He creates an | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The course is best suited for an Intermediate student. Course is good to have since oit convers the topic from its very basic perspective. For graduates this course is more time consuming and dosnt recommended. Advantages: -very simple descriptions -even a non mathematical background student can easily understand -Proofs in all forms(geometric, analatic, practical) descrition. Disav: -basic are explained and consuming too much time -dosnt going for advanced level -no high level explanations or topics. | For graduates this course is more | Time | consuming and dosnt recommended. Advantages: -very | Positive | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The course is best suited for an Intermediate student. Course is good to have since oit convers the topic from its very basic perspective. For graduates this course is more time consuming and dosnt recommended. Advantages: -very simple descriptions -even a non mathematical background student can easily understand -Proofs in all forms(geometric, analatic, practical) descrition. Disav: -basic are explained and consuming too much time -dosnt going for advanced level -no high level explanations or topics. | are explained and consuming too much | Time | -dosnt going for advanced level -no | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Professor Fowler is great! He spends some time explaining the theory behind the topic, and makes everything pretty easy to visualize. I would love if there were a few more resources with example problems. The quizzes can be pretty challenging, if you haven't done any practice problems first. My favorite thing about this MOOC and Prof. Fowler is his excitement--which makes it feel, less like a lecture and more, like a fun conversation about calculus. | Fowler is great! He spends some | Time | explaining the theory behind the topic, | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This class has taught me so much, just keep coming back to it because once I think I've figured something out I realize I didn't learn something else properly. I hope this class remains online and open all the time, it is very helpful to me because I was never really good at math in high school and I have decided to return to college after 10 years and I wish to earn a degree with a concentration and math because now that time has past ive lived a little and Im older I do see how advanced math is used in everyday life and I want to have a part in that. Thank you again for this class! | remains online and open all the | Time | it is very helpful to me | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This class has taught me so much, just keep coming back to it because once I think I've figured something out I realize I didn't learn something else properly. I hope this class remains online and open all the time, it is very helpful to me because I was never really good at math in high school and I have decided to return to college after 10 years and I wish to earn a degree with a concentration and math because now that time has past ive lived a little and Im older I do see how advanced math is used in everyday life and I want to have a part in that. Thank you again for this class! | concentration and math because now that | Time | has past ive lived a little | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This is truly a brilliant and amazing course. It is as fun the 10th time through as the first. I never tire of it! Seriously! It is about more than calculus. It is about mathematical thinking. | It is as fun the 10th | Time | through as the first. I never | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | A fun filled yet insightful course with great illustrations. You'll love calculus by the time you are done with this! Amazing prof! | illustrations. You'll love calculus by the | Time | you are done with this! Amazing | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The professor spends LOTS of time doing really, really simple work -- over-explaining things, to be honest, in such a way that makes them more confusing. Then he does not explain much more complex issues throughout the course. Very frustrating, even as someone who has taken calculus before and is just taking this as a "refresher." | The professor spends LOTS of | Time | doing really, really simple work -- | Negative | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have officially hit the halfway point of the course and am three weeks ahead of schedule. The last time I took a Calculus class was 17 years ago, during my Senior year of high school. It was the first time I ever got a B in Math, and ruined my love for the subject. Since then, I had all but abandoned my love for the subject because I thought I had a learning deficiency for Calculus. It turns out that my teacher was just sub-par, or leagues below Dr. Fowler. As someone who is strong with numbers, he is the perfect professor to bring out the conceptual learning student in me. The most impressive thing though is how he has delivered rules to me in an almost photographic format. After each lesson, which are all theoretical then provide graphical and numericalnexamples,I do one practice problem with what I absorbed and check the answer. It is normally incorrect, but after reading the correct answer and explanation I fly through the next five. Although I am sure that not having closed book graded quizes and more practice problems may subtract from his classroom course a bit, this is an amazing confidence booster and has propelled me nback on track! | weeks ahead of schedule. The last | Time | I took a Calculus class was | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have officially hit the halfway point of the course and am three weeks ahead of schedule. The last time I took a Calculus class was 17 years ago, during my Senior year of high school. It was the first time I ever got a B in Math, and ruined my love for the subject. Since then, I had all but abandoned my love for the subject because I thought I had a learning deficiency for Calculus. It turns out that my teacher was just sub-par, or leagues below Dr. Fowler. As someone who is strong with numbers, he is the perfect professor to bring out the conceptual learning student in me. The most impressive thing though is how he has delivered rules to me in an almost photographic format. After each lesson, which are all theoretical then provide graphical and numericalnexamples,I do one practice problem with what I absorbed and check the answer. It is normally incorrect, but after reading the correct answer and explanation I fly through the next five. Although I am sure that not having closed book graded quizes and more practice problems may subtract from his classroom course a bit, this is an amazing confidence booster and has propelled me nback on track! | high school. It was the first | Time | I ever got a B in | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course is brilliant. The lectures are full of information, but they're also funny, engaging and always enjoyable. And there are loads of them (25 hrs?), so this feels like quite a thorough introduction to calculus. Some of the exercises are pretty tough for a newcomer like me, but the answers are always thoroughly explained. The lack of a hard time limit is very welcome because it gives you time to take in new ideas at your own pace, without rushing you through assignments or tests. What's more, it's all free. Hats off! | explained. The lack of a hard | Time | limit is very welcome because it | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course is brilliant. The lectures are full of information, but they're also funny, engaging and always enjoyable. And there are loads of them (25 hrs?), so this feels like quite a thorough introduction to calculus. Some of the exercises are pretty tough for a newcomer like me, but the answers are always thoroughly explained. The lack of a hard time limit is very welcome because it gives you time to take in new ideas at your own pace, without rushing you through assignments or tests. What's more, it's all free. Hats off! | very welcome because it gives you | Time | to take in new ideas at | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | very good considering the amount of information conveyed in the short amount of time. A few of the tests were slightly glitchy in the acceptable range of correct answers (in terms of rounding answers) and would only accept things like 17*sqrt(15426) as the answer, even if an equivalent value down to the 6th decimal place was give instead. | conveyed in the short amount of | Time | A few of the tests were | Positive | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | An excellent course and the best I have seen for calculus. It is very easy to understand and covers all topic and most importantly, it does so in a very short period of time. Thank you to the creator of this course. | in a very short period of | Time | Thank you to the creator of | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | good lessons but i cant manage time to listen . but now i decided to be punctual. | good lessons but i cant manage | Time | to listen . but now i | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course is great. I have been in love with math since i was a child. But, I took an English Major at my campus. Though, it's been like forever since the last time i learned Math, I don't find it difficult to understand this course. | been like forever since the last | Time | i learned Math, I don't find | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Wounder full, first time i deeply learn what is function, limit and the whole Calculus. i love it. | Wounder full, first | Time | i deeply learn what is function, | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Superb! A very small but important thing that has grabbed my attention is the energy with which professor teaches. He tends to repeat very important concepts many times so as to make them permanent in the brains of students. 5+ stars. Keep it up. More than impressed. | to repeat very important concepts many | Time | so as to make them permanent | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I did calculus in my final year of school, and a couple of years later I've realised I'm actually going to need this calculus. This course not only got me back to the level l was at when I finished school, but it gave me a much better understanding of the fundamental concepts and processes behind everything I had once upon a time learned, which gave me a much better understanding. | everything I had once upon a | Time | learned, which gave me a much | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I recommend you this course. This course is very nice. Lectures are very easy to understand even if you are first time of calculus. But I think the questions are too little to exercise enough. Anyway thanks for the instructor. He's very nice and passionate guy. | understand even if you are first | Time | of calculus. But I think the | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent course, far better than any I have encountered previously. The course takes time, but Jim Fowler shows step by step how the derivation and integration fit together in one whole: calculus. Relevant theorems and proofs are highlighted clearly. | have encountered previously. The course takes | Time | but Jim Fowler shows step by | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have always loved math and I always will, but I enjoy this class because at times when I doubt my love of math, this class somehow reassures me. | I enjoy this class because at | Time | when I doubt my love of | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | and with the text. There are | Time | when one can take a quiz | Positive | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | this discouraging and a waste of | Time | Save those for a later course, | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | tricky trig problem at the same | Time | as a single example. The second | Positive | 0.94 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | one of them. Much of the | Time | he's OK, especially when the camera | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This is the course that I'm taking for right now before closing time for math assignments for me. I know Calculus is a large subject with all new topics dividing into modules. The Calculus 1 will be included functions, limits, infinities, derivatives, and area and integrals. I will just do my best as I can in order to try Calculus; it's going to be tough for me to listen. There's a lot of stuffs going on in Calculus. | taking for right now before closing | Time | for math assignments for me. I | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | A total waste of time -- not challenging at all in any aspect. It was quite funny that many word problems were identical with only some parameters changing :) Buckeyes... please, try harder next time :) | A total waste of | Time | -- not challenging at all in | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | A total waste of time -- not challenging at all in any aspect. It was quite funny that many word problems were identical with only some parameters changing :) Buckeyes... please, try harder next time :) | . . please, try harder next | Time | :) | Negative | 0.85 | 1.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Prof Fowler is the most engaging math teacher of all time! | most engaging math teacher of all | Time | | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Great course, although at times I had problems with figuring out how to enter my solution into the answer box. | Great course, although at | Time | I had problems with figuring out | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This course is very awesome. Professor's unconventional way of explaining the concepts really helped me learn some of the tough concepts. I really enjoyed Calculus for the first time :) | really enjoyed Calculus for the first | Time | :) | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I enjoyed it. Jim Fowler does well, his enthusiasm and the time and effort he (and whatever filming and editing team he has) have put into the presentation is impressive. Difficult for me to rate it as a maths course - how would I know whether it covers what it needs and have anything meaningful to stay about the standard of it. I felt I understood what was going on, I passed the quizzes. Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug in the quizes - nothing you can't work around (eg totally blank question but four answers to choose from.) The mathematical symbol rendering doesn't work on the mobile app at all. | does well, his enthusiasm and the | Time | and effort he (and whatever filming | Positive | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| 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. | set up makes me angry every | Time | I have to deal with it. | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | very handy and saves a lot of time for making plot with R | handy and saves a lot of | Time | for making plot with R | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | The course did a good overview of the different plotting systems in R, but it rushed through clustering. I had to watch the videos of k-means and hierarchical clustering at least 3 times to sort of understand it. The matrix concepts went completely over my head. Otherwise, the projects were very interesting, and I would highly recommend this course to other people. | and hierarchical clustering at least 3 | Time | to sort of understand it. The | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | I have taken the course earlier, so am somewhat familiar with the layout and the materials. Overall it is a very good course and covers a wide range of subject matters. Roger has done a very good job explaining the concepts. I certainly would recommend this course to all who's interested in the subject. I realize that there's limitation on the time people suppose to spend each week, however, I would like to suggest adding homework, in addition to quizzes. Several video clips have some audio issues, not sure if that's fixable. | realize that there's limitation on the | Time | people suppose to spend each week, | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Great course, lots of interesting material! However, I wish this course was not so fast-paced. If more time was dedicated to every subject and more examples were provided, that would make a learning process more effective. | was not so fast-paced. If more | Time | was dedicated to every subject and | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | In my opinion, this course help me to see regular items in different ways. Also, it open for me "world of design" it is something new for me. I liked this course because it is simple, i can learn in different time. | simple, i can learn in different | Time | | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | very nice and amazing time learning in this course | very nice and amazing | Time | learning in this course | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great intro to graphic design. Covers a lot of concepts in a short period of time. | concepts in a short period of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I really enjoyed this course, I like how It is organized, I like the teacher too, I think that makes a big difference. Many times this course surprised me with things I believed obvious or things I didn't know at all. I would recommend this course to everyone interested in this subject. Thank you CalARTS and Coursera for this opportunity! | that makes a big difference. Many | Time | this course surprised me with things | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a great course for those trying to try their hand at Graphic Design for the first time. | at Graphic Design for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great way to get acquainted with the basic tools of graphic design. I will be sure to use them next time I am creating a presentation at work or in my personal life. | be sure to use them next | Time | I am creating a presentation at | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I was so happy when saw this course for the first time. It became the first step to my dream career. All lessons and assignments are very useful and interesting to watch and implement. Thanks you very much for such an opportunity! | saw this course for the first | Time | It became the first step to | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a great course for expanding the way I thought about making, communicating with, and looking at graphic images. At times I was frustrated because I did not know how to easily do certain things with the programs I was using, but I reminded myself that this was not a class on how to use Photoshop or Illustrator. If you are looking to learn about actually using programs, look elsewhere, but if you are looking to build a strong basis for thinking about creating images, this is a great resource. The course work and necessary time input is flexible - if you are stretched for time you can still complete this course, and if you have a lot of time you can get a lot more out of it. Either way, a lot of the learning from this work is dependent on how much effort you put it. | and looking at graphic images. At | Time | I was frustrated because I did | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a great course for expanding the way I thought about making, communicating with, and looking at graphic images. At times I was frustrated because I did not know how to easily do certain things with the programs I was using, but I reminded myself that this was not a class on how to use Photoshop or Illustrator. If you are looking to learn about actually using programs, look elsewhere, but if you are looking to build a strong basis for thinking about creating images, this is a great resource. The course work and necessary time input is flexible - if you are stretched for time you can still complete this course, and if you have a lot of time you can get a lot more out of it. Either way, a lot of the learning from this work is dependent on how much effort you put it. | resource. The course work and necessary | Time | input is flexible - if you | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a great course for expanding the way I thought about making, communicating with, and looking at graphic images. At times I was frustrated because I did not know how to easily do certain things with the programs I was using, but I reminded myself that this was not a class on how to use Photoshop or Illustrator. If you are looking to learn about actually using programs, look elsewhere, but if you are looking to build a strong basis for thinking about creating images, this is a great resource. The course work and necessary time input is flexible - if you are stretched for time you can still complete this course, and if you have a lot of time you can get a lot more out of it. Either way, a lot of the learning from this work is dependent on how much effort you put it. | - if you are stretched for | Time | you can still complete this course, | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a great course for expanding the way I thought about making, communicating with, and looking at graphic images. At times I was frustrated because I did not know how to easily do certain things with the programs I was using, but I reminded myself that this was not a class on how to use Photoshop or Illustrator. If you are looking to learn about actually using programs, look elsewhere, but if you are looking to build a strong basis for thinking about creating images, this is a great resource. The course work and necessary time input is flexible - if you are stretched for time you can still complete this course, and if you have a lot of time you can get a lot more out of it. Either way, a lot of the learning from this work is dependent on how much effort you put it. | if you have a lot of | Time | you can get a lot more | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | It's a great course to start the Coursera Specialization for Graphic Design giving you a basic understanding of the principles. Depending on your own motivation, it is time consuming or not. In my opinion, it's a great course, I learned a lot and am waiting for the next one - Typography - to hopefully be able and complete the whole specialization. | on your own motivation, it is | Time | consuming or not. In my opinion, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Brilliant Course. It gives you a good theoretical understanding of modern graphic design. At the same time, it also gives you ample opportunity to make graphic design through its multiple peer reviewed assignments. Personally, I came out with some of my best poster works during this course as it pushed me to experiment beyond what I had done till then. | modern graphic design. At the same | Time | it also gives you ample opportunity | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great course. Make sure you plan time to do all of the optional exercises, they are great. | Great course. Make sure you plan | Time | to do all of the optional | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course does go over some of the basics of graphic design, but I expected it to be a lot more rigorous. The assignments are incredibly simple, and I think that there should be no optional assignments in the class. The reason I'm taking this class is because I have a hard time motivating myself to learn on my own, so I need something that will really push me. I only spent about an hour a week completing this course, and I believe that you can't learn something by only spending an hour a week on it. Also what's the point of having mentors if they don't engage with you? I know I could have contacted them if I had a question, but I didn't because it was so easy. I wouldn't mind getting feedback from a professional graphic designer though if they're available. Also seeing how many students misinterpret the assignments, it makes me nervous that they are the ones grading mine. | is because I have a hard | Time | motivating myself to learn on my | Negative | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I had a great time doing this course. Professor Worthington covers the theory in an interesting and useful way. The lectures are short and sweet. The best part of the course is the 9 creative assignments (2 compulsory and 7 optional, but recommended) that really force you to expand your technical skill set and get out of your comfort zone. | I had a great | Time | doing this course. Professor Worthington covers | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Absolutely loved this class. Found it to be very helpful and worth my time and money. I think the professor did a great job with his lectures and I enjoyed the assignments. Thank you. | be very helpful and worth my | Time | and money. I think the professor | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Perfect short introduction to Graphic Design. I wish I could have dedicated more time for the optional assignments! | wish I could have dedicated more | Time | for the optional assignments! | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This is a great course for getting into art in general. A lot of the course is very cursory and never goes too far into detail like some classes do, which can be overwhelming. The structure of required vs optional assignments was great, allowing you to choose where you'd like to practice more or even just additionally be able to continue (whereas some people cannot). I would highly recommend this course to everyone. I look forward to continuing the entire specialization when I have more time. Until a couple of months from now, CalArts - you have made me a happy student! | entire specialization when I have more | Time | Until a couple of months from | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I found this course extremely engaging and interesting. The fundamentals are basic but that's what the outline states. It's good for beginners or graphic designers who need a refresher on the basics. You can execute the course at your own pace, following the timeline or completing assignments and lectures ahead of time. I'd highly recommend this course. | completing assignments and lectures ahead of | Time | I'd highly recommend this course. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Loving this course! It has a really nice pace. I always prefer shorter videos cause then I can divide the week up and not have to find hours to do it all at the same time. Also it is easier to think along (I am doing it as an after work extra activity). Probably a lot of things are basics but this was exactly what I was looking for. Also the system of mandatory and optional tasks is really nice cause people can choose how deep they want to go. I have skipped optional things cause I do not want to design myself, more work better together with the designers but I might change my mind during the next course cause I am definitely taking the hole spezialisation! | do it all at the same | Time | Also it is easier to think | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Nice class. Quite inspiring at times. | Nice class. Quite inspiring at | Time | | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Nice short course with the right balance of theory and practical assignments. Only two assignments are required for completion but there are several assignments that are optional and to get the full benefit of this course, the optional assignments are important, if you have the time for it. The course covers all the basics and it's fun. | are important, if you have the | Time | for it. The course covers all | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This is an excellent introduction to graphic design. Time is not spent on learning the technology, but rather on producing the examples of art and typography. Thank you. | an excellent introduction to graphic design. | Time | is not spent on learning the | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I really liked this short course. Having not been exposed to any kind of arts classes before (not since elementary school anyway), I felt this instructor explained things in a way (and used examples as he explained) that I could understand. It got me to appreciate just how much you can do just by changing simple things like typeface and size. This class got me doing stuff that I hadn't done in a long time, like painting with water colors. It was not a complicated or challenging class, but it was a very good introduction, which is what I think it was intended to be. It was approachable and it inspires further exploration. | I hadn't done in a long | Time | like painting with water colors. It | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I enjoyed Fundamentals of Graphic Design. The course in such a small time makes you understand the thinking that goes behind any creative work. Thank you. Amit | The course in such a small | Time | makes you understand the thinking that | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Very practical and enjoyable introduction to graphic design. It condenses a lot of content in an approachable and diversified way so it's useful to learn a lot in little time. It's also encouraging to put all the concepts taught into practice with various media, with its balance between technique and talent. I like the instructor's way to express the importance of relying on the idea over difficulty. Among the MOOCs I've taken on art topics, this one stands out as one of the most clarifying and fulfilling. | to learn a lot in little | Time | It's also encouraging to put all | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Some tough assignment questions which lead to much longer homework time than anticipated, so you need to leave ample time to complete the assignments. But, great class over-all. | which lead to much longer homework | Time | than anticipated, so you need to | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Some tough assignment questions which lead to much longer homework time than anticipated, so you need to leave ample time to complete the assignments. But, great class over-all. | so you need to leave ample | Time | to complete the assignments. But, great | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | I thought this course was an informative introduction to an important class of electronics. The lecturer was easy to follow, except during certain topics. That, however, is more due to the difficult nature of the subject than a fault of the professor. I found myself pausing and rewatching some portions so I could gain a better understanding but I don't have any problems with that. There is a good balance between more generalized overviews of key circuit concepts and more detailed analyses of specific circuit topologies. You may have to do some outside research to fully understand all details and I know some people may be turned off by that. I believe it is fine, and it is a good way to learn how to find information on your own. I did not have to do this more than a few times (that would actually be annoying). Lastly, the assignments were just challenging enough to force me to actually grasp the material, without making it seem like it was impossible to complete. | do this more than a few | Time | (that would actually be annoying). Lastly, | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The course is very good, but would like to make three suggestions: 1) You don't have a feedback from what you made wrong in the exercises. It is usefull to learn from the mistakes. 2) One week is a short lead time for the tasks 3)It might include extra optional tasks regarding simulation | One week is a short lead | Time | for the tasks 3)It might include | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Well done in terms of mathematical rigor and explaining the basics. One critique that I have is that there isn't enough time spent on intuition around the circuits. For instance, how does the buck converter work from a more qualitative standpoint? Easy to look up online, I understand, but the professor is excellent and I would benefit from his perspective. | have is that there isn't enough | Time | spent on intuition around the circuits. | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Great course and a great teacher. The assignments were great and really prompted you to learn. I liked how they weren't too easy and at the same time they weren't insanely difficult. Any effort that you put in learning the course was payed off. Hopefully the other courses in the specialization will be similar. And of course, the content of the course was very interesting and informative. Looking forward to the future courses. | too easy and at the same | Time | they weren't insanely difficult. Any effort | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| IjmG7ah6EeWhzw6RmNsYkQ | One of the best courses that I have ever taken. I hope that I had more time to read the recommended materials and to do the research before I completed the final project. Will Professor Lipschits and his team provide more courses on this platform regarding the history of Judah in other periods in the future? | I hope that I had more | Time | to read the recommended materials and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Ijr8rurHEeSb-yIACwuKNg | While the visual set up is well thought out (you can see the instructor, slides and writing space, the setup of course materials is too stringent for the beginning chemist. More time seems to be needed focusing on the basics of chemistry and chemistry math (such as how to read CH4, sig figs, etc) prior to testing on stoichiometry. | stringent for the beginning chemist. More | Time | seems to be needed focusing on | Negative | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| iN8yoSWdEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | It was really challenging, and interesting course. I wish I had more time to work with it. | course. I wish I had more | Time | to work with it. | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | All familes sholud have this vourse, as it increases the concious on the importance of home made food and the time spent together with the kids | of home made food and the | Time | spent together with the kids | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I was so thankful to do this course a second time for my certificate because it refreshed my memory on the healthy pantry options and since I originally did it I had eliminated processed meats and cans from my grocery list but the refresher helped me to learn ways to create recipes, discover their nutrition facts and present it as for a recipe book | to do this course a second | Time | for my certificate because it refreshed | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I've done this course twice (once for my personal information and work, and again to receive the certificate). I always learn something new the second time around; very informative on a home level and professional level. | always learn something new the second | Time | around; very informative on a home | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I could learn more deeply and apply them in daily life. Every time I choose my diet, I remember contents of this lecture. Thank you for making such a good lecture and I hope to apply it again. | apply them in daily life. Every | Time | I choose my diet, I remember | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Good basic information for every parent to know. All of us should make time to cook healthier food for our families. | know. All of us should make | Time | to cook healthier food for our | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Very easy to go through, the material sticks to you and you will be making healthy choices in no time. | be making healthy choices in no | Time | | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | In general, this course is very nice and informative but the recipes should mention cooking time. Also, I find it a bit scary that the author doesn't make her own chicken broth a processed one. | but the recipes should mention cooking | Time | Also, I find it a bit | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | A class that can benefit the entire family. Well worth the time. A respectable source as well. | the entire family. Well worth the | Time | A respectable source as well. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I love this course, it really helps with me being a mum who works full time to not get complacent with the fast foods that are readily available, and to go back to cooking properly and sitting down for a good meal. | being a mum who works full | Time | to not get complacent with the | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | She is very easy to understand and listen to. I love that some recipe ideas were given and that I could go back into this at my own pace and time. | this at my own pace and | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This is the best course I've ever did on Coursera (and the only one that I've successfully completed so far!). The instructor is very practical and to the point in her explanations. Each session was very engaging and i appreciate the time taken for her to create the live/animated graphics. This never felt like a boring regular classroom session, most of them were shot in her kitchen, which kept the learner engaged. The tips and the cooking sessions are awesome. I don't have a kid yet, but will surely come back to this course when i have one. Kudos :-) | very engaging and i appreciate the | Time | taken for her to create the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | As a mother of a 5 years old kid,i found it so useful for my cooking.The course is easy to understand and conduct.The knowledge is very practical and the food introduced here are very healthy.Especially the freedom of the time.Thank you sooooo much! | healthy. Especially the freedom of the | Time | Thank you sooooo much! | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Excellent course, well presented and full of great information. Thank you for taking the time to offer it. | information. Thank you for taking the | Time | to offer it. | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | It was fun doing this course and at the same time was quite informative. The small things matters most is what you realise and long time back Mahatma Gandhi has said most of the things especially the economic and ecological aspects of our food consumption and habits and has predicted the difficulties we would face. JC Kumarappa on Economy of Permanence is a good read in this regard. Excellent presentation and even a kid will watch it with great interest. | this course and at the same | Time | was quite informative. The small things | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | It was fun doing this course and at the same time was quite informative. The small things matters most is what you realise and long time back Mahatma Gandhi has said most of the things especially the economic and ecological aspects of our food consumption and habits and has predicted the difficulties we would face. JC Kumarappa on Economy of Permanence is a good read in this regard. Excellent presentation and even a kid will watch it with great interest. | is what you realise and long | Time | back Mahatma Gandhi has said most | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Awesome and easy to follow for parents and people interested in food and nutrition. I recommend this course to people who are not even parents but just struggling with weight or nutrition issues as it´s well made, easy to follow and not too time consuming or deep. Thanks. | easy to follow and not too | Time | consuming or deep. Thanks. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | know how their needs change over | Time | this course is not for you. | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | weight and how that changes over | Time | I wanted to know medically verified | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Child Nutrition and Cooking was a pretty fun and easy course. As a stay at home mom and experience novice cook since childhood this class was more of a recap of basic cooking for me and a nice reminder of nutritional goals and current standards. I enjoyed it for my introduction to Coursera. Unfortunately this course didn't offer offer a certificate or statement of accomplishment in any form at the time I took it. :( | accomplishment in any form at the | Time | I took it. :( | Positive | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Lots of great information. I appreciate the time and effort that went into this. | of great information. I appreciate the | Time | and effort that went into this. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Easy, simple and clear. Does not need extra learning time so you can do it even with a busy schedule. I think everybody should be aware and take in consideration eating aspects. Was totally happy with the course content. | clear. Does not need extra learning | Time | so you can do it even | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This is a great course. I take it every chance I get. This will be my third time completing it and every time I do, I not only refresh my current knowledge, but I learn something new, or relearn something that I had forgotten. I very highly recommend this choice. It has helped me make more positive and healthier choices | get. This will be my third | Time | completing it and every time I | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This is a great course. I take it every chance I get. This will be my third time completing it and every time I do, I not only refresh my current knowledge, but I learn something new, or relearn something that I had forgotten. I very highly recommend this choice. It has helped me make more positive and healthier choices | third time completing it and every | Time | I do, I not only refresh | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Great and easy explained with video's and drawings. Loved the cooking demo's for some fresh and homemade meals. Also great for families with no children since there are basic food facts everyone should know about. Quizzes are fun and informative and the time needed to follow up was enough even with deadlines. | are fun and informative and the | Time | needed to follow up was enough | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Very helpful!! I am not a mother yet, so luckily, I still have time to improve my cooking, haha! | yet, so luckily, I still have | Time | to improve my cooking, haha! | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | There's a little bit too much in the way of "buy organic!" when there's no evidence to recommend that but other than that a very nice course. I would recommend that they retool it to be more accessible to people on the lower income brackets. I got news for you, "almond flour" is not something most people are going to spring for when it costs several times what wheat flour does. | spring for when it costs several | Time | what wheat flour does. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I have no regrets at all in starting and ending this course! It is indeed a great motivation especially for me because I'm a semi-vegetarian and at the same time fond of organic food. I'll be always grateful to this learning experience! :) | a semi-vegetarian and at the same | Time | fond of organic food. I'll be | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I loved every single moment of it, especially the cooking demonstrations. i am not a mom yet but i hope to be soon, in the main time i would apply all i have learnt to my self. Thank you so much | to be soon, in the main | Time | i would apply all i have | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I really enjoy how in-depth the lessons are. I have four small children and have learned that they eat and drink what we do because they love to mimic us as their role models and if we would not want a bunch of junk in our bodies why should our children. This world is so fast paced and fast food junkies yet we can still make even small choices that are healthy for us like maybe a grilled chicken or a salad if we absolutely have to have something while out. Otherwise it's much better and cheaper to cook at home and have family time | cook at home and have family | Time | | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This course indicated to me how important and irreplaceable is healthy eating during children's growth and development. Also, cooking for your child is a beautiful way to spend time together, express love and stimulate your child to develop good habits. During this course I've learned how to easily make several healthy meals and how to deal with everyday problems and healthy eating. Also, I got familiar with some crucial facts like reading nutrition facts labels and the huge impact of processed food on our health and environment. Thank you very much! | is a beautiful way to spend | Time | together, express love and stimulate your | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I very much enjoyed this course and I learned so much! Very simple, easy to understand, but highly informative and valuable information. I would actually take this course a second time as a refresher because I liked it so much! Instructor was very clear, easy to understand, and pleasant to listen to. Her videos were also relaxed and fun which helped keep me interested. | actually take this course a second | Time | as a refresher because I liked | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | It is the first time I can hear directly about the importance of 'child nutrition' in every day life setting. I do thank for this introduction, thanks to the Stanford University for this interesting online course. I do hope that there will be more friends of mine in Indonesia that also should pay attention to this great source of learning | It is the first | Time | I can hear directly about the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | It's an excellent course for new moms who are worried about feeding right our children. Maya is really nice, and all the information provided is really helpfull and easy to do in our lifes. Thank you so much for taking the time of doing this course for us. | you so much for taking the | Time | of doing this course for us. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Very good. Nice choice of person to teach this course Her knowledge and soothing voice and occasional cameos of her kids made this very easy to absorb, relate and want to learn more. My next shopping trip to the store was 90% more healthier than before. I made better decisions about what I want to feed my family....especially my 2 year old granddaughter that pretty much loves all veggies and fruit. Great time to influence her eating habits. | loves all veggies and fruit. Great | Time | to influence her eating habits. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I really enjoyed it. It is very flexible (time wise) and the teacher has a lot of experience that she shares with us. | enjoyed it. It is very flexible | Time | wise) and the teacher has a | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Well-structured lessons, comprehensively covers planning & initiation stages of project management. The quizzes felt a little easy at times! | quizzes felt a little easy at | Time | | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I felt the initial splash screen was a bit time consuming, also lot of the knowledge felt like more bookish. Could have been different styles of management and approaches or even how leaders in the past like Dale Carneige would have approached. This course has a lot of potential and I feel revising the next version would make it so much better for novice program managers | initial splash screen was a bit | Time | consuming, also lot of the knowledge | Positive | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | This was a great course, and I espesially liked the last bonus video. The creaters have grosely underestimateed how much time you are going to use on week 4 though (about scoping). For those of us who does these courses in our work time, that makes it really hard to plan the day. | creaters have grosely underestimateed how much | Time | you are going to use on | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | This was a great course, and I espesially liked the last bonus video. The creaters have grosely underestimateed how much time you are going to use on week 4 though (about scoping). For those of us who does these courses in our work time, that makes it really hard to plan the day. | does these courses in our work | Time | that makes it really hard to | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I found this course to be invigorating, knowledgeable, and relevant. I am very happy I took it. I will be able to immediately use the skills I learned. I hope to learn as much in the next course leading to my goal to a specialization. Thanks for all the support, and making my time here worth all the effort. | all the support, and making my | Time | here worth all the effort. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Excelent course!! Thanks for your time. | Excelent course! ! Thanks for your | Time | | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | There is a LOT of material in this course. The videos go a little too fast at times, so a 10 minute video would usually take me like 20 so I could get some notes from it. The presentations are perfectly structured, but they are a bit long, so again plan on spending a good 20 minutes per presentation if you plan on taking notes and all. Finally, the role of the PMBOK Guide as complimentary material to this class is strongly under-emphasized in the introduction. However, all optional reading is from this guide and another book also mentioned in the introduction. Maybe mention this in the intro so people can make a more informed decision as to buying those books or not. | go a little too fast at | Time | so a 10 minute video would | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Fast moving course. Covered a lot of material quickly. I took this course as a refresher since I have managed a number of large projects in the past bit do not have a pmi certification. I learned some things! I glad I spent the time. | things! I glad I spent the | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | it is really good and worth the time | is really good and worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Well structured course, great presenter, really interesting materials, overall the whole 3 Part course is well worth doing. The bonus videos that the presenter does on real life examples are excellent and I've watched some of them multiple times. The course is useful not only aa good introduction to PM tools and techniques but also to reinforce what the role of the project manager actually is. | I've watched some of them multiple | Time | The course is useful not only | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The course is great resource of information. The biggest drawback is the need of using Flash to view most of the lecture. This limited my ability to went through the course on time - I "attend" Coursera courses using my iPhone while commuting and it is not possible for this course. | to went through the course on | Time | - I " attend" Coursera courses | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The course, as intended probably, is theoretical and gives a good snapshot of project management. Following the PMBOK guide and covering all the relevant portions in the limited time deserves an applause. The only area of improvement, I felt, was the case study.It could have been a little more detailed and has scope of increased level of difficulty. A good course overall and beneficial in almost all walks of work :) Thank you ! | the relevant portions in the limited | Time | deserves an applause. The only area | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | Completing this course was a great learning on understanding IoT platform. The course sessions provided by trainers and documentation were very useful to complete the assignments. Discussions column to work with Trainers directly improved my confidence on completing the assignments on time. Collecting of data is useful only when analyzed. Regards, Mohan. | confidence on completing the assignments on | Time | Collecting of data is useful only | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | Good course - frustrating at times but you got to put the work in and really read the assignments carefully | Good course - frustrating at | Time | but you got to put the | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | This is a practical hands on course with very responsive teaching staff. On mature reflection I personally wish I had made the time for a python tutorial before starting that assignment. Most of it is javascript though and probably the same holds if you are unfamiliar with javascript/nodejs programming - do a tutorial first. Overall I had some fun with this and I learnt new stuff. I had to use a simulator for the SenseHat; it probably would increase the fun factor if you have a real SenseHat. | personally wish I had made the | Time | for a python tutorial before starting | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | Hi, I am an IT specialist (30 years experience). I undertook the course so I could learn about IBM Bluemix and IoT development, and extend my skills/understanding of the environment. However, I have very little good to say about this course offering. I had numerous issues with what was offered: The videos were generally ok, but some had poor audio. There was minimal video (compared to any other course I have done), and more detail and discussion in videos would have been more helpful. Some of the video material is out of date already, as I suspect Bluemix layout has changed - this made navigation a bit confusing. The downloadable Pi image has changed since the course was prepared, and the newer image has different code as standard. I ended up having to muddle-through manually loading packages and dependencies, etc. to get things to work. I lost many hours trying to debug and rework assignment code, just to get it to work for the grader tool. This was further complicated by not having good debug output from the grader to work with. Naturally some of the grader fails were my own fault, but the majority of issues I ran in to could have been avoided by better worded assignments and/or more detail about requirements. Lastly, it was taking sometimes days to get any response to requests for guidance on the forums / discussions. In fact, I think the majority of useful assistance came from other students who had run in to the same issue(s). When you have a course that is such a short time frame, you really need to be providing assistance in a timely manner. I could not, in any good faith, recommend anyone take this course in the future - which is a little saddening. I do thank the lecturers for their efforts thus far, and sincerely hope they can either improve or drop this course offering in the future. | course that is such a short | Time | frame, you really need to be | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| iRl53_BWEeW4_wr--Yv6Aw | This was a decent class to get started on programming a Raspberry Pi and hooking it up to a web service. The material was easy to follow and the instructions were precise. With this class, you'll be in a position to create interesting applications using the Raspberry Pi There were two negatives to this class: 1) Most of the assignments used the Node Red environment. This is a visual programming tool. Although it's easy to use, I would have preferred programming using a more widely used and more powerful environment. 2) The auto grader for the class was not very robust and did a poor job of giving feedback on why things weren't passing. Several times, the assignment would pass in my environment but fail in the auto grader due to (incorrect) assumptions that the auto grader was making about implementation. Overall, this was a worthwhile course but could use some improvement. | on why things weren't passing. Several | Time | the assignment would pass in my | Negative | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| Is9jHhyKEeaHoAovRHhd_Q | I like very much. Now, I joint this course as the second time, because this course gives deeper understand about Einstein and his theory of Special Relativity. | joint this course as the second | Time | because this course gives deeper understand | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| ISGr03Q9EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Este módulo traz exemplos interessantes de como as conversas devem ser conduzidas. Me fez perceber, que apesar de ter uma boa intenção, muitas vezes eu acabava direcionando minhas conversas com minha equipe, e isso com certeza limitava o desenvolvimento do time. | com certeza limitava o desenvolvimento do | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The course is a very basic introduction and can be completed in very short time period (< 10 h) if you're good with computers. This should be integrated to the next course in the specialisation (R programming) to create a five week course with introduction. | can be completed in very short | Time | period (< 10 h) if you're | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The course is fine, however its more an introduction than a course. The course in itself doesn't teach much, should have been the first week of subsequent courses. I went through all 4 weeks in 1 week, the whole course is mostly about downloading different tools and signing up for accounts. What I didn't like is that the teachers seem to be really concerned about their reputation and workload. Its repeated several times that you shouldn't email the teachers with questions and that online questions should be of a certain standard, its understandable but its a bit patronizing. I think teachers should be available for questions, even if its only through the forum (which they are) Its understandable that there are a lot of students so direct emails might overwhelm but that's just part of the job, we pay for the course, we should also get support when its not working for us. Overall I wouldn't advise taking this course if you aren't taking it as part of the specialization. | reputation and workload. Its repeated several | Time | that you shouldn't email the teachers | Negative | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Would like to have seen more material using git and git bash commands. More repetition here would be helpful. Seems like a lot of this information will be lost or forgotten when it comes time to use it, especially as it relates to the Data Science Specialization. | lost or forgotten when it comes | Time | to use it, especially as it | Positive | 0.75 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course was a great intro to these concepts and helpful guide to getting things set up and getting used to the MOOC format, as well! A few times it seemed like the slides jumped right in while skipping over a bit of context, but was able to orient myself with some googling and asking friends some basic questions to figure things out. | MOOC format, as well! A few | Time | it seemed like the slides jumped | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A really interesting course, and also, basic and simple. The lectures are a little fast though. I hope I would continue this course if I have time. | continue this course if I have | Time | | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Excellent Course for learning Basics. I had no previous experience with software, computers aside from surfing web, checking e-mails and some Microsoft Office. I'd recommend this course to anyone Interested in data-science or coding in general. The course is easy but not too easy the frustration of dealing with computers exists and I feel it was important for myself to struggle a little bit. I followed the advice of the instructors and sought out solutions to issues. I spent twenty hours a week but if you are tech savvy, take good notes, follow directions and everything goes as planned you could possibly get through the course in a lot less time. There are also a lot of people willing to help. The course shows you how to seek out help efficiently. I didn't request any help this time around had I done so I would have spent half as much time on the course. | the course in a lot less | Time | There are also a lot of | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Excellent Course for learning Basics. I had no previous experience with software, computers aside from surfing web, checking e-mails and some Microsoft Office. I'd recommend this course to anyone Interested in data-science or coding in general. The course is easy but not too easy the frustration of dealing with computers exists and I feel it was important for myself to struggle a little bit. I followed the advice of the instructors and sought out solutions to issues. I spent twenty hours a week but if you are tech savvy, take good notes, follow directions and everything goes as planned you could possibly get through the course in a lot less time. There are also a lot of people willing to help. The course shows you how to seek out help efficiently. I didn't request any help this time around had I done so I would have spent half as much time on the course. | I didn't request any help this | Time | around had I done so I | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Excellent Course for learning Basics. I had no previous experience with software, computers aside from surfing web, checking e-mails and some Microsoft Office. I'd recommend this course to anyone Interested in data-science or coding in general. The course is easy but not too easy the frustration of dealing with computers exists and I feel it was important for myself to struggle a little bit. I followed the advice of the instructors and sought out solutions to issues. I spent twenty hours a week but if you are tech savvy, take good notes, follow directions and everything goes as planned you could possibly get through the course in a lot less time. There are also a lot of people willing to help. The course shows you how to seek out help efficiently. I didn't request any help this time around had I done so I would have spent half as much time on the course. | would have spent half as much | Time | on the course. | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | you can do the quizzes 3 | Time | every 8 hours and just trial | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Complete waste of time. This should be a course on its own, and much less be charged for. This should have been the 1st week of an actual class. This only dealt with installing a couple of software tools. Hopefully the following courses will teach something worthwhile. | Complete waste of | Time | This should be a course on | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A great little course, quite basic but very informative if you - like me - do not have a lot of knowledge on the subject. It can be taken in a day if you have some time to spare. | a day if you have some | Time | to spare. | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Extremely helpful. It was detailed and at the same time brief, made sure I am able to connect with the content and learn in ways that will be useful in career. Also, the exams and exercises made sure that my concepts are deep rooted into me. Great Course. | was detailed and at the same | Time | brief, made sure I am able | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A good but brief introduction to a number of useful skills. I learned a lot in a short amount of time but I still have a long way to go. I was somewhat disappointed in the lack of communication with a TA or instructor. The message boards were desolate and could not support any kind of a robust discussion of the conceptual issues involved with data science. | lot in a short amount of | Time | but I still have a long | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | waste of time. except for git and github ,nothing much is in it. | waste of | Time | except for git and github , | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course is a good first into to the topic. I think that the additional reading from the book and the Git manual will supplement it very well. My only complain is that in the first quiz, there was a question regarding some R packages used in Machine Learning that were not covered in the slides. It took me a while to find those so I had to take the first quiz 3 times. I think this question should be revised to guide the student as to how to find these packages. Another alternative would be that in the slides there some guidance in this matter. Otherwise, I liked to course and the final assignments. | to take the first quiz 3 | Time | I think this question should be | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course was a loss of time and money. Except from week 3 material, the rest can be found on the internet and should be required by everyone who wants to take that specialization. This course doesn't worth it, it's just to take extra money from anyone who wants to learn about Data Science. | This course was a loss of | Time | and money. Except from week 3 | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course gives a wonderful introduction to the world of data science. You'l probably finish it with plenty of time to spare which makes jumping in the middle of the next course very tempting. I did that and i had a hard time. It would be best to familiarize yourself with the other commands in github and explore the many helpful sites instead. | probably finish it with plenty of | Time | to spare which makes jumping in | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course gives a wonderful introduction to the world of data science. You'l probably finish it with plenty of time to spare which makes jumping in the middle of the next course very tempting. I did that and i had a hard time. It would be best to familiarize yourself with the other commands in github and explore the many helpful sites instead. | that and i had a hard | Time | It would be best to familiarize | Negative | 0.73 | 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. | to enable users to take more | Time | for the " R programming" . | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 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. | be free. don't lose too much | Time | on it, it's doable in a | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The first week's quiz is really difficult and I had to go through the lecture material several times. Because of the great number of very short lectures it is difficult to find an asnwer to sought question. | go through the lecture material several | Time | Because of the great number of | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Extremely remedial. Not worth the time or cost on it's own, unfortunately it's required for the specialization. | Extremely remedial. Not worth the | Time | or cost on it's own, unfortunately | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Not worth the price. Extremely basic stuff spread very thin over too much time just to be able to charge for it. | spread very thin over too much | Time | just to be able to charge | Negative | 0.88 | 1.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very good pace, sequencing, and mix of lecture and practice. Only suggestion is a bit more time on the "Add", "Commit", which appears to be a very core element of file handling/version management with GitHub. | Only suggestion is a bit more | Time | on the " Add" , " | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Maybe, I am already somehow experienced, but I think that the time I spent on that was a waste :/ | experienced, but I think that the | Time | I spent on that was a | Negative | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I found this course a fairly easy introduction to the tools you will need for this series of courses, however I already had a rudimentary knowledge of Linux and Bash Shells. For the computer novice this may be more daunting. The one area that is worth spending some time on as an investment for the future is git and git-hub. Understanding how these work together is not transparent. It took me a while to figure out what I had to do to push committed files to a remote site. I think suggested reading could be more specific to guide people in this area. | area that is worth spending some | Time | on as an investment for the | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Great for beginners. Just take your time and you'll be able to figure everything out. | Great for beginners. Just take your | Time | and you'll be able to figure | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I think this course could have been done in two 30 minute videos. It jumps in with overviews but contain some high level items you won't understand until later in the course and it really doesn't give enough context to be meaningful at the time. It almost seems like it was thrown together without a clear mission of what should be in the introduction. Being a developer who has used some of the tools in this toolbox (Git, GitHub, Command Line) this intro really glosses over tools that most non developers won't understand. If I had a say in what should be in this intro it would be one video end to end of setting up the tools. The second video would be all about the history and logic and some of the applications we will be exploring without all the r formulas in the slides. | context to be meaningful at the | Time | It almost seems like it was | Negative | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Clear and concise. Can be completed in a very short period of time. | in a very short period of | Time | | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very Basic Course. Doesn't require the time that was allotted to it. | Very Basic Course. Doesn't require the | Time | that was allotted to it. | Negative | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The Data Scientist's Toolbox the second course that i have taken in the Coursera. I have completed this course in a short time but the course is awesome and providing info from basic and videos are helping a lot. I think to become a data scientist this is the best place to start pleased to complete rest of the course also. Thank you Coursera for providing such awesome course. | completed this course in a short | Time | but the course is awesome and | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The Data Scientist’s Toolbox is a great way to dip into Data Science and the methodology behind it. The course is very general, and makes an effort to cover the bigger scope of things without delving deep in any. More than anything, it's a great way to learn the components and uses of data science and set a framework for all that will be coming after. The materials are very well laid-out and almost feel like attending college classes. The visuals and slides are a little dry, but the pace is lively enough to maintain momentum at all times. | enough to maintain momentum at all | Time | | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The course was nice but seemed too trivial at times of discussion about basic tools like git and command line interfaces. | nice but seemed too trivial at | Time | of discussion about basic tools like | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | highly recommended for newbs in any kind of development, otherwise waste of time. | kind of development, otherwise waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I'm doing this training for the second time, now as a beta-tester. Particular comments about lecture content, problems, etc. have been put in every lecture. General comments, in short: 1) Related to the new platform and UI design: _ It is cleaner and simpler than the previous one. I like it, BUT... _ It lacks of some useful features: saving intermediate results in quizzes before submit them; calendar; limited number of subforums. _ The most relevant flaw: there are not downloadable versions of lecture slides. Unacceptable! No way to check most of the links we saw in slides (URLs not visible). _ Description and steps in course project appear "too packed" together. I prefer the former design. 2) Related to content: _ The course is mainly for preparing students for the rest of data science specialization program. When you said "toolbox" you mean the concrete toolbox you will need to do the program. Some people expect to have a general introduction to data science but that is only a half of the content. I think this is clear enough in the presentation but for some reasons there are people in forums who protest the content, so maybe you should insist more in this fact. _ I would like to suggest some kind of reorder of material: week 2 is all about installing a running tools and week 3 about key aspects of data analysis. Maybe you can split both types of content between wk2 and wk3 to make wk2 more appealing for not technical oriented students. _ Git is a source of problems for a good portion of people. See my comments in lectures about how Git is explained. | doing this training for the second | Time | now as a beta-tester. Particular comments | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The new graphic is really nice and helpful. Even the fact that you can retake the quizzes after 8 hours is really nice. I have noticed that there wasn't any possibility to download pdf files of the lessons (or I didn't see it), the last time I took the course there was this possibility and I found it so helpful. | I didn't see it), the last | Time | I took the course there was | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| It7SNTe-EeWCYBKNeFwojw | Great course. The lecturer is excellent. No wasting fo time, but also fun. Recommend it! | lecturer is excellent. No wasting fo | Time | but also fun. Recommend it! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| It7SNTe-EeWCYBKNeFwojw | Now this is a course to spend time learning! It's very well prepared in terms of material, it's useful and fun, and it provides ready to use skills I can immediately apply to my websites. | this is a course to spend | Time | learning! It's very well prepared in | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| It7SNTe-EeWCYBKNeFwojw | Really well explained and easy to follow course. Also it's free, which is something hard to find on coursera these days. Thanks for taking the time to spread knowledge. | these days. Thanks for taking the | Time | to spread knowledge. | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| It7SNTe-EeWCYBKNeFwojw | The videos are clear, easy to follow and with plenty of examples, great information and content. Lots of material and sources to read, actually in my case not enough time to read it. The teacher YaaKov is a great instructor, his assignments are written in great detail and very clear steps, so is easy to comprehend and execute. The teacher as well as the teaching staff always answer promptly and in depth your questions or comments in the forum. This is my second course with Yaakov Chaikin and I am very happy with this particular course and the great instructor and the extra resources he offers to learn . | actually in my case not enough | Time | to read it. The teacher YaaKov | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| ix6p0FfOEeWT8xIUiEQHHQ | Hello, I already finished the cours. The cours show me ways and procedures to make plannings and schedule controls things that I was looking for since long time. I strongly recommend the cours for planners initiators and budget schedulers. Best regards, Henry Capellan | I was looking for since long | Time | I strongly recommend the cours for | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| IXfI4OuZEeWTQApGcKeRIQ | The course do not match its price at all, it is catastrofically sketchy. First time while using Coursera I am so much unsatisfied with some course. | all, it is catastrofically sketchy. First | Time | while using Coursera I am so | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| IXfI4OuZEeWTQApGcKeRIQ | I thought at times the explanations were a bit concise. If I look at the process mining course for example, a lot more video material is included (and its price is lower) with more concrete examples and practice. For non programmers it is not evident to find a solution to some of the assignments and there isn't much guidance on how to use certain tools. therefore, the time to be invested for non programmers - especially in week 3 - is far more than the hou | I thought at | Time | the explanations were a bit concise. | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| IXfI4OuZEeWTQApGcKeRIQ | I thought at times the explanations were a bit concise. If I look at the process mining course for example, a lot more video material is included (and its price is lower) with more concrete examples and practice. For non programmers it is not evident to find a solution to some of the assignments and there isn't much guidance on how to use certain tools. therefore, the time to be invested for non programmers - especially in week 3 - is far more than the hou | to use certain tools. therefore, the | Time | to be invested for non programmers | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This was a very good experience for me. The material was easily digestible but at the same time with at lot of depth. I love how the professor invites you to dig into the more academic material without it being a prerequisite | easily digestible but at the same | Time | with at lot of depth. I | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | The Professor knows very well how to express the ideas and concepts at the same time he gives real life examples. The course is very well structured and it has a lot of interesting and useful material! Very good one! | ideas and concepts at the same | Time | he gives real life examples. The | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| J0igZhzvEeSGAiIACxMEjA | I loved the tour of the campus. It fit the material and made it seem more like a college setting than watching lectures on a screen in a class room all the time. | in a class room all the | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| J0igZhzvEeSGAiIACxMEjA | I was terribly disappointed in this course. Mr. Onuf spends the majority of these lectures implying what Jefferson thinks without discussing much in the way of actual history. Further, the course seems more of a commercial for the University of Virginia than anything else. Overall, a waste of time. | anything else. Overall, a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| J0igZhzvEeSGAiIACxMEjA | I knew nothing about Jefferson before this course and nothing about his 'age' - not sure I am much the wiser about the latter after it! I enjoyed the tours round the historic sites and I thought the lecturer came over as warm and enthusiastic but it seemed he was preaching about a saint rather than giving a detached academic assessment of a historical figure and I found that it was hard to see the wood for the trees at times. Hagiographic might be an unkind description but it was certainly very respectful to the great man. I also liked the use of a student in cooperation with the lecturer.- he set the scene well and was a good interviewer. | the wood for the trees at | Time | Hagiographic might be an unkind description | Negative | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| j3fuwJ3EEeSfuyIACxcGsQ | I am so glad to have found this course!! I had taken a course on MOS transistor operation during grad school, and never quite felt comfortable with the material, since not much time was spent discussing how the relevant mosfet equations came about. Professor Tsividis's discourse is like a breath of fresh air. They are so lucid that I feel I understand the material better now. The course is well structured; as I go through it systematically, I can see how one lesson connects to the concepts presented in a previous one. Thank you so much, Dr. Tsividis for sharing your enthusiasm and knowledge about this topic. | with the material, since not much | Time | was spent discussing how the relevant | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | The sequence of the learning movie are not good and some times while teaching the the movie is ended. Besides, rather than educational material this course refer to several website. | movie are not good and some | Time | while teaching the the movie is | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | I'm sorry to say this is a poor course. The audio is bad, the sound editing is bad, the "videos" are mainly static slides that sometimes aren't even showing what the audio is talking about. There are no worked examples or annotated slides. As an example, there's no discussion of the difference between WordPress.org and WordPress.com. The only time that is mentioned is when they touch on plugins, where they say you can't use them if you started with WordPress.com! The additional lectures by guest website designers were the most interesting part, but they were supposed to be after the final project. I just gave up after less than an hour and went and played with WordPress myself. Created a website in 2 days, but with no help from this course. | org and WordPress. com. The only | Time | that is mentioned is when they | Negative | 0.63 | 1.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | Despite all the bad reviews this course got I told myself to give it a try to refresh my antic prior knowledge and since it is for my personal usage and not a career I m not interested in a certificate. So I went through all the open sites which were extremely disappointing. Since I was warned by the reviews, I was not even tempted to pay to unlock further pages. I attended many interesting courses on Coursera, but this one is simply a waste of time from the very first moment. | one is simply a waste of | Time | from the very first moment. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 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. | warn people not to waste their | Time | with this course in it's current | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| jA4AZLlTEeWfYA612mWHZw | 1 out of 10. A waste of time. If I cannot participate in discussions, forums, submit assignments, or give reviews, I might as well watch youtube lectures. The course content was very poor as well. (this is based on the unpaid material) This course should be scrapped and not offered as an unpaid course. Its a classical case of bait and switch. | out of 10. A waste of | Time | If I cannot participate in discussions, | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| JBCvTm03EeWEewoyD2Bc5Q | The course helped me understand that being afraid is common but that giving one step forward proves fear wrong. It opened my ideas to a million more, it guided me into clearer ways of understanding how my idea can come true. I definitely recommend this course if you don't even know where to start from. Don't underestimate the time you need to work on it ;) | to start from. Don't underestimate the | Time | you need to work on it | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| JBCvTm03EeWEewoyD2Bc5Q | It is a great course. As the presenters said, it is not tailored to Silicon Valley companies or to sell great inventions. It will help any time of business from dog grooming or barber shops to the Facebook | great inventions. It will help any | Time | of business from dog grooming or | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | the language of this video is to high, it's like to be for reading more than speaking ( Too Formal). The Content is quite good, but it needs more time in order to fully understand it. | quite good, but it needs more | Time | in order to fully understand it. | Positive | 0.94 | 3.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | The Subtitles were bad not in sync with the words of the professor and were wrong in many cases. Delivery of lecture and Visuals of the lecture was Ok. Module 4& 5 were very confusing and not interesting Thank You Professor for your time and effort | interesting Thank You Professor for your | Time | and effort | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| jcbwGG00EeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | One of the best courses I have come across. Highly resourceful and worth the time and money. | across. Highly resourceful and worth the | Time | and money. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I have just completed this course. This is my first attempt to understand Buddhism and have approached this with all the biases inherent in having lived my whole life as a Westerner who has spent very little time trying to understand mysticism or meditation. The abstract concepts of Buddhist thought stretched my mind greatly and at times I had to stop the video just to reflect on some concept so abstract I had to play segments of the video lecture over and over again. Dr Wright seems to labor greatly on getting his explanations as plain and straightforward as he could. He held my attention without gimmicks and if I didn't get the point the first time, the video playback format made it possible for me to go over one point or another as I needed. If you come with all the usual Western bias and baggage toward Eastern (in this case Buddhist) concept and thought and would like to learn. This is the place to start. You won't be disappointed. | Westerner who has spent very little | Time | trying to understand mysticism or meditation. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I have just completed this course. This is my first attempt to understand Buddhism and have approached this with all the biases inherent in having lived my whole life as a Westerner who has spent very little time trying to understand mysticism or meditation. The abstract concepts of Buddhist thought stretched my mind greatly and at times I had to stop the video just to reflect on some concept so abstract I had to play segments of the video lecture over and over again. Dr Wright seems to labor greatly on getting his explanations as plain and straightforward as he could. He held my attention without gimmicks and if I didn't get the point the first time, the video playback format made it possible for me to go over one point or another as I needed. If you come with all the usual Western bias and baggage toward Eastern (in this case Buddhist) concept and thought and would like to learn. This is the place to start. You won't be disappointed. | stretched my mind greatly and at | Time | I had to stop the video | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I have just completed this course. This is my first attempt to understand Buddhism and have approached this with all the biases inherent in having lived my whole life as a Westerner who has spent very little time trying to understand mysticism or meditation. The abstract concepts of Buddhist thought stretched my mind greatly and at times I had to stop the video just to reflect on some concept so abstract I had to play segments of the video lecture over and over again. Dr Wright seems to labor greatly on getting his explanations as plain and straightforward as he could. He held my attention without gimmicks and if I didn't get the point the first time, the video playback format made it possible for me to go over one point or another as I needed. If you come with all the usual Western bias and baggage toward Eastern (in this case Buddhist) concept and thought and would like to learn. This is the place to start. You won't be disappointed. | didn't get the point the first | Time | the video playback format made it | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Loved this course. It was a lot of fun. The Prof. really cares about the subject and how his students contribute to his own understanding of it. (He takes a lot of time reading students' comments and replying to them during "office hours.") He also reaches out to experts in both psychology and Buddhism and shows you his dialogue with them. Finally, the guiding questions for the assignments are a good challenge and the instructions for structuring the paper very clear. I didn't have time to write the papers but will as soon as I've the time. Bonus: you get to meet his dogs, and they're awesome. | it. (He takes a lot of | Time | reading students' comments and replying to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Loved this course. It was a lot of fun. The Prof. really cares about the subject and how his students contribute to his own understanding of it. (He takes a lot of time reading students' comments and replying to them during "office hours.") He also reaches out to experts in both psychology and Buddhism and shows you his dialogue with them. Finally, the guiding questions for the assignments are a good challenge and the instructions for structuring the paper very clear. I didn't have time to write the papers but will as soon as I've the time. Bonus: you get to meet his dogs, and they're awesome. | paper very clear. I didn't have | Time | to write the papers but will | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Loved this course. It was a lot of fun. The Prof. really cares about the subject and how his students contribute to his own understanding of it. (He takes a lot of time reading students' comments and replying to them during "office hours.") He also reaches out to experts in both psychology and Buddhism and shows you his dialogue with them. Finally, the guiding questions for the assignments are a good challenge and the instructions for structuring the paper very clear. I didn't have time to write the papers but will as soon as I've the time. Bonus: you get to meet his dogs, and they're awesome. | will as soon as I've the | Time | Bonus: you get to meet his | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | A waste of my time. | A waste of my | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Firstly I enjoyed it - it was interesting. Secondly I found it did what it said it would do - it was informative. The teaching was good. The assessments were relevant and did assess learning without being too time consuming or difficult. There was a forum which was interesting. I'd definitely do another one. | did assess learning without being too | Time | consuming or difficult. There was a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | This course is a wonderful nexus between east and west, between science and religion, between intuition and reason and between all those dichotomies, the false ones and more! It is just a shame that discussion forum moderators have become petty tyrants given censorship powers. At least, that was how it was last time I was bothered enough to try to get this stuff. One star subtracted, but it should be more given discussion is the only way really to do philosophy. Only one will do though because I guess it is a systemic problem and that it probably doesn't affect those of you who aren't borderline trolls who imbeciles easily mistake for the bad kind. | that was how it was last | Time | I was bothered enough to try | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Well worth the time. I am someone who has been meditating for a few years and I am practicing Psychologist and Psychotherapist. I was interested to understand how my experiences with meditation can relate to the word of modern psychology and this course was very persuasive in its approach and content. | Well worth the | Time | I am someone who has been | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | excellent course!! worth every second of your time. | ! worth every second of your | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Professor Wright was incredible, learned a lot from this class in such a condensed period of time. Couldn't be happier with it. | in such a condensed period of | Time | Couldn't be happier with it. | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Very interesting topics are discussed in this course. I walked away with some new thoughts and ideas about modern science and how they compared to ancient teachings. Well worth the time. | to ancient teachings. Well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | This was such an enjoyable course and has had a profound impact on my life. I now meditate and use mindfulness much more than I did. Robert Wright as a lecturer is easy to understand, patient and also adds humour to the course, with the consideration of the level of Buddhist temperament shown by his dogs during the tutorials. Time well spent. Thank you. | by his dogs during the tutorials. | Time | well spent. Thank you. | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | It was pretty good for most of the time. I found the professor engaging and interesting. He was an effortless speaker who never seemed bored--you could tell he was passionate, but did not alienate students by using too much jargon or academe-speak. I sort of fell off of the course toward the end mostly because I felt much of the material began to repeat (or at least became extremely predictable). Overall, really great course. | pretty good for most of the | Time | I found the professor engaging and | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | Although I do not have time to finish my assignments, I'd like to say: Your series of lectures have changed the way I look at life. Thank you, Robert and your inspiring dogs, Frasier and Milo. | Although I do not have | Time | to finish my assignments, I'd like | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I admit to being a novice when it comes to Buddhist thought, but I've followed Robert Wright's work since reading The Moral Animal many years ago. I found the course to be a wonderful introduction to Buddhist thought, but more importantly an inventive and thoughtful attempt to connect that worldview and its prescriptions to current thinking in western psychology. Whether you're interested in evolutionary psychology, neuroscience or mindfulness - or better yet, all three - I think you'll find this course well worth your time. Mr. Wright is a wonderful writer and teacher. | find this course well worth your | Time | Mr. Wright is a wonderful writer | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I am very attached to this Course & would find it extremely difficult not having an affective reaction to it. This is the second time I have audited this Course & hope to audit it each time it is available. Dr. Wright is a wonderful teacher & presents some very difficult concepts in very clear, concise, understandable language. Thank you so very much for this Course. | to it. This is the second | Time | I have audited this Course & | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I am very attached to this Course & would find it extremely difficult not having an affective reaction to it. This is the second time I have audited this Course & hope to audit it each time it is available. Dr. Wright is a wonderful teacher & presents some very difficult concepts in very clear, concise, understandable language. Thank you so very much for this Course. | & hope to audit it each | Time | it is available. Dr. Wright is | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | This is the 2nd time taking this course and I find it more interesting and a deeper experience after a second review. The online references are also very helpful! Great job! | This is the 2nd | Time | taking this course and I find | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| JdB92adFEeS5zCIAC8pMPA | I love this course, I am so excited it is back up and I will be taking it for a second time! | be taking it for a second | Time | | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Took me more than initial 4 weeks to finish the course. The classmates discussion forum is really helpful. The moderators however are very silent. Not giving enough feedbacks and help most of the time. | feedbacks and help most of the | Time | | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course is quite tough, and I often thought to myself: "If this is an intermediate level, what does a professional level look like?" Especially the later assignments are quite difficult and time consuming to solve (it says, you need approximately three hours to solve the last one. Well, it took me about 30 hours to come up with a half-decent attempt). However: if you really want to learn something new about cool flying robots (and who doesn't?) and are willing to spend quite an amount of effort and time, this is the course for you! | later assignments are quite difficult and | Time | consuming to solve (it says, you | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course is quite tough, and I often thought to myself: "If this is an intermediate level, what does a professional level look like?" Especially the later assignments are quite difficult and time consuming to solve (it says, you need approximately three hours to solve the last one. Well, it took me about 30 hours to come up with a half-decent attempt). However: if you really want to learn something new about cool flying robots (and who doesn't?) and are willing to spend quite an amount of effort and time, this is the course for you! | quite an amount of effort and | Time | this is the course for you! | Negative | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Really good. Unavoidably complicated at times but presented well. Later assignments are quite difficult. | Really good. Unavoidably complicated at | Time | but presented well. Later assignments are | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The video lectures provide an introduction to quadrotor flight dynamics and path planning. The lectures are ok. Unfortunately: At least one of the coding assignments has a significant bug in the termination condition. The mentors will ignore any help requests that deal with the bug in their code. The assignments involve a lot of hand tuning of PD controllers. That's a reasonable task to perform once or twice, but it rapidly becomes extremely tedious and detracts from the other materials that are being taught. The final assignment doesn't do a particularly good job evaluating the required test condition. If you do take the course I'd want you to know: You should expect to modify the provided code to fix their bugs. There are no "gotcha" quiz questions. If you are confused by getting a question wrong you might want to re-try your answer. There seems to be a bug in the way at least one quiz question is set up. On the final assignment you can modify the simulation step where it makes things run in "real time". Removing that step makes the simulation run much more quickly and allows for faster iteration. To conclude: This is a course with a lot of potential, but unless Coursera makes an effort to improve the course I would not recommend it. | makes things run in " real | Time | . Removing that step makes the | Positive | 0.75 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Enjoyed the course. It was a good introduction. There is a good room for improvement though: 1- More time should be spent on 3D quadrotor control 2- Trajectory planning was not completely explained; importantly 2d and 3d need a lot more attention with focus on solving for minimum snap trajectory 3- TA support was almost unavailable. TAs should be active during the course | room for improvement though: 1- More | Time | should be spent on 3D quadrotor | Negative | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Assignments for week 3 and 4 were very tough and a little guidance was provided on how to do the coding part. But since I'm interested in the course i'm re-enrolling to complete it this time. | i'm re-enrolling to complete it this | Time | | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course successfully covers the mechanics and control topics of quadrotors. The course also points to some resources in order to extend your study on UAVs. However, there are some issues concerning the assignments which I didn't like at all: 1. Big gap in difficulty between assignments of first three weeks compared with the assignment of the fourth week. 2. The difficulty of the assignments of the first three weeks just relied on sweeping (somewhat 'smartly') a 1,2,3, or 6 dimensional parametric space. I guess that real UAVs engineers are not paid for this. In some assignment, I had to edited a file which I was not supposed to edit in order to pass it. 3. The last assignment was quite frustrating for the following reasons 3a. Really long running times to test if the parameters work fine. I would sacrifice the fancy real-time visualization to save some time. Apart from long running times, I guess that UAVs are not solving ODEs in real time on board, so I think is more interesting a more practical/real-time approach. 3b. Search in a 12-dimensional parametric space (some parameters are equal, but still you end up tunning 5,6 independent parameters, which influence each other). Come on, is this useful? I am sure that UAVs engineers don't spend their hours in this kind of crappy search. You could explain at least some existing heuristics when having so many control parameters to tune. 3c. Even though the drone trajectory seems to fit perfectly the planned trajectory, you might not pass the exercise, and you would get some clueless messages telling you the final position/velocity is not correct. 3d. The assignment guide is very unclear in some parts. 3e. A lot of typos in the formulas of the last part of the guide. I decided to completely ignore it and develop my own strategy, which turned out to be far simpler and easier to implement. 3f. The submission program tests the whole exercise regardless you passed some sections or not, which make the waiting times even longer. | following reasons 3a. Really long running | Time | to test if the parameters work | Negative | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course successfully covers the mechanics and control topics of quadrotors. The course also points to some resources in order to extend your study on UAVs. However, there are some issues concerning the assignments which I didn't like at all: 1. Big gap in difficulty between assignments of first three weeks compared with the assignment of the fourth week. 2. The difficulty of the assignments of the first three weeks just relied on sweeping (somewhat 'smartly') a 1,2,3, or 6 dimensional parametric space. I guess that real UAVs engineers are not paid for this. In some assignment, I had to edited a file which I was not supposed to edit in order to pass it. 3. The last assignment was quite frustrating for the following reasons 3a. Really long running times to test if the parameters work fine. I would sacrifice the fancy real-time visualization to save some time. Apart from long running times, I guess that UAVs are not solving ODEs in real time on board, so I think is more interesting a more practical/real-time approach. 3b. Search in a 12-dimensional parametric space (some parameters are equal, but still you end up tunning 5,6 independent parameters, which influence each other). Come on, is this useful? I am sure that UAVs engineers don't spend their hours in this kind of crappy search. You could explain at least some existing heuristics when having so many control parameters to tune. 3c. Even though the drone trajectory seems to fit perfectly the planned trajectory, you might not pass the exercise, and you would get some clueless messages telling you the final position/velocity is not correct. 3d. The assignment guide is very unclear in some parts. 3e. A lot of typos in the formulas of the last part of the guide. I decided to completely ignore it and develop my own strategy, which turned out to be far simpler and easier to implement. 3f. The submission program tests the whole exercise regardless you passed some sections or not, which make the waiting times even longer. | fancy real-time visualization to save some | Time | Apart from long running times, I | Negative | 0.79 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course successfully covers the mechanics and control topics of quadrotors. The course also points to some resources in order to extend your study on UAVs. However, there are some issues concerning the assignments which I didn't like at all: 1. Big gap in difficulty between assignments of first three weeks compared with the assignment of the fourth week. 2. The difficulty of the assignments of the first three weeks just relied on sweeping (somewhat 'smartly') a 1,2,3, or 6 dimensional parametric space. I guess that real UAVs engineers are not paid for this. In some assignment, I had to edited a file which I was not supposed to edit in order to pass it. 3. The last assignment was quite frustrating for the following reasons 3a. Really long running times to test if the parameters work fine. I would sacrifice the fancy real-time visualization to save some time. Apart from long running times, I guess that UAVs are not solving ODEs in real time on board, so I think is more interesting a more practical/real-time approach. 3b. Search in a 12-dimensional parametric space (some parameters are equal, but still you end up tunning 5,6 independent parameters, which influence each other). Come on, is this useful? I am sure that UAVs engineers don't spend their hours in this kind of crappy search. You could explain at least some existing heuristics when having so many control parameters to tune. 3c. Even though the drone trajectory seems to fit perfectly the planned trajectory, you might not pass the exercise, and you would get some clueless messages telling you the final position/velocity is not correct. 3d. The assignment guide is very unclear in some parts. 3e. A lot of typos in the formulas of the last part of the guide. I decided to completely ignore it and develop my own strategy, which turned out to be far simpler and easier to implement. 3f. The submission program tests the whole exercise regardless you passed some sections or not, which make the waiting times even longer. | some time. Apart from long running | Time | I guess that UAVs are not | Negative | 0.87 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course successfully covers the mechanics and control topics of quadrotors. The course also points to some resources in order to extend your study on UAVs. However, there are some issues concerning the assignments which I didn't like at all: 1. Big gap in difficulty between assignments of first three weeks compared with the assignment of the fourth week. 2. The difficulty of the assignments of the first three weeks just relied on sweeping (somewhat 'smartly') a 1,2,3, or 6 dimensional parametric space. I guess that real UAVs engineers are not paid for this. In some assignment, I had to edited a file which I was not supposed to edit in order to pass it. 3. The last assignment was quite frustrating for the following reasons 3a. Really long running times to test if the parameters work fine. I would sacrifice the fancy real-time visualization to save some time. Apart from long running times, I guess that UAVs are not solving ODEs in real time on board, so I think is more interesting a more practical/real-time approach. 3b. Search in a 12-dimensional parametric space (some parameters are equal, but still you end up tunning 5,6 independent parameters, which influence each other). Come on, is this useful? I am sure that UAVs engineers don't spend their hours in this kind of crappy search. You could explain at least some existing heuristics when having so many control parameters to tune. 3c. Even though the drone trajectory seems to fit perfectly the planned trajectory, you might not pass the exercise, and you would get some clueless messages telling you the final position/velocity is not correct. 3d. The assignment guide is very unclear in some parts. 3e. A lot of typos in the formulas of the last part of the guide. I decided to completely ignore it and develop my own strategy, which turned out to be far simpler and easier to implement. 3f. The submission program tests the whole exercise regardless you passed some sections or not, which make the waiting times even longer. | are not solving ODEs in real | Time | on board, so I think is | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course successfully covers the mechanics and control topics of quadrotors. The course also points to some resources in order to extend your study on UAVs. However, there are some issues concerning the assignments which I didn't like at all: 1. Big gap in difficulty between assignments of first three weeks compared with the assignment of the fourth week. 2. The difficulty of the assignments of the first three weeks just relied on sweeping (somewhat 'smartly') a 1,2,3, or 6 dimensional parametric space. I guess that real UAVs engineers are not paid for this. In some assignment, I had to edited a file which I was not supposed to edit in order to pass it. 3. The last assignment was quite frustrating for the following reasons 3a. Really long running times to test if the parameters work fine. I would sacrifice the fancy real-time visualization to save some time. Apart from long running times, I guess that UAVs are not solving ODEs in real time on board, so I think is more interesting a more practical/real-time approach. 3b. Search in a 12-dimensional parametric space (some parameters are equal, but still you end up tunning 5,6 independent parameters, which influence each other). Come on, is this useful? I am sure that UAVs engineers don't spend their hours in this kind of crappy search. You could explain at least some existing heuristics when having so many control parameters to tune. 3c. Even though the drone trajectory seems to fit perfectly the planned trajectory, you might not pass the exercise, and you would get some clueless messages telling you the final position/velocity is not correct. 3d. The assignment guide is very unclear in some parts. 3e. A lot of typos in the formulas of the last part of the guide. I decided to completely ignore it and develop my own strategy, which turned out to be far simpler and easier to implement. 3f. The submission program tests the whole exercise regardless you passed some sections or not, which make the waiting times even longer. | or not, which make the waiting | Time | even longer. | Negative | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Excellent course, good planned and good use of online resources. Some things that could be improved are: encouraging students to implementation using hardware, not only simulations, and also there is a lot of material in the course that is rapidly reviewed, some more time could be invested into this. | that is rapidly reviewed, some more | Time | could be invested into this. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A tough score, which I have mixed feelings about as there was good stuff in here too. The course material is interesting and moves at a robust pace and I do think they have made an effort despite the fact that much of it appears lifted from one PhD student's dissertation. Realistically I would not recommend this course if you don't have a STEM Bachelor's degree and you will likely find it painful if you have been away from your degree more than three years. None of this is bad, although the material would have benefitted by being spread out by perhaps two more weeks as realistically people who have been in the workplace a long time may need more time, and have less time per week with family commitments. Unfortunately there are a number of areas that need work: 1 - Inconsistencies and errors in the material. Certain unexplained suffixes in equations and worse, changes in the suffixes without indication that they changed or what they are. I don't feel that this was particularly widespread but it did result in some loss of confidence in the course and time being wasted "interpreting" 2 - Tests throughout the course that often provide the relatively limited feedback of "correct well done" or worse I'm sorry to say, the relatively useless feedback "sorry that is not correct", without ANY explanation of why it was correct or more importantly what an incorrect answer should have been and why. I can understand that this will hopefully drive students should do more research, but if they hit a wall, realistically they're going to keep iterating on the answers until you pass and learn nothing because of the time pressure to complete by the end of the week. I wonder if there is a better mechanism that can be used here 3 - TA Support - The lack of TA support coupled with some concern about a history of errors led the students to believe that there was an error in week 3. For 10 days students went back and forth debating which one of the two equations that were supposedly doing the same thing but with missing terms were correct. NOT ONCE did a TA wake up and step in. In the end one of the students flagged the video as "inappropriate" to wake the UPenn organization up. The TA then stepped in and said (I paraphrase) "oh, we just dropped those terms because they're not so important, but we didn't mention that..." If you are not going to adequately support the students, the material had better be bullet-proof and show some linear thinking 4 - The last exam. Keep in mind if you do this course, you had better be comfortable with calculus, linear algebra, vector math/mechanics and it would be helpful to have a head start in Matlab. That said, the last question in the last exam, was an order of magnitude more challenging than everything else set and almost felt like a "shake out" question. I passed the course and had a good understanding of the material, but I suspect that the folks that did, made it through that last question in multiple random fashions. The material itself is relatively academic and the trajectory topic was definitely so. Unfortunately the one example (jerk trajectory) provided appears to have left a lot of students feeling very unsupported based on feedback I saw, and would probably benefit from having an example more fully worked through. As for the final exam, it would be highly desirable for UPenn to provide insight into how they would have solved the last part of the last question as my concern is that there is a whole contingent of people who did this course who didn't come away with as good a grounding on trajectories as they may believe they have | been in the workplace a long | Time | may need more time, and have | Positive | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A tough score, which I have mixed feelings about as there was good stuff in here too. The course material is interesting and moves at a robust pace and I do think they have made an effort despite the fact that much of it appears lifted from one PhD student's dissertation. Realistically I would not recommend this course if you don't have a STEM Bachelor's degree and you will likely find it painful if you have been away from your degree more than three years. None of this is bad, although the material would have benefitted by being spread out by perhaps two more weeks as realistically people who have been in the workplace a long time may need more time, and have less time per week with family commitments. Unfortunately there are a number of areas that need work: 1 - Inconsistencies and errors in the material. Certain unexplained suffixes in equations and worse, changes in the suffixes without indication that they changed or what they are. I don't feel that this was particularly widespread but it did result in some loss of confidence in the course and time being wasted "interpreting" 2 - Tests throughout the course that often provide the relatively limited feedback of "correct well done" or worse I'm sorry to say, the relatively useless feedback "sorry that is not correct", without ANY explanation of why it was correct or more importantly what an incorrect answer should have been and why. I can understand that this will hopefully drive students should do more research, but if they hit a wall, realistically they're going to keep iterating on the answers until you pass and learn nothing because of the time pressure to complete by the end of the week. I wonder if there is a better mechanism that can be used here 3 - TA Support - The lack of TA support coupled with some concern about a history of errors led the students to believe that there was an error in week 3. For 10 days students went back and forth debating which one of the two equations that were supposedly doing the same thing but with missing terms were correct. NOT ONCE did a TA wake up and step in. In the end one of the students flagged the video as "inappropriate" to wake the UPenn organization up. The TA then stepped in and said (I paraphrase) "oh, we just dropped those terms because they're not so important, but we didn't mention that..." If you are not going to adequately support the students, the material had better be bullet-proof and show some linear thinking 4 - The last exam. Keep in mind if you do this course, you had better be comfortable with calculus, linear algebra, vector math/mechanics and it would be helpful to have a head start in Matlab. That said, the last question in the last exam, was an order of magnitude more challenging than everything else set and almost felt like a "shake out" question. I passed the course and had a good understanding of the material, but I suspect that the folks that did, made it through that last question in multiple random fashions. The material itself is relatively academic and the trajectory topic was definitely so. Unfortunately the one example (jerk trajectory) provided appears to have left a lot of students feeling very unsupported based on feedback I saw, and would probably benefit from having an example more fully worked through. As for the final exam, it would be highly desirable for UPenn to provide insight into how they would have solved the last part of the last question as my concern is that there is a whole contingent of people who did this course who didn't come away with as good a grounding on trajectories as they may believe they have | a long time may need more | Time | and have less time per week | Positive | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A tough score, which I have mixed feelings about as there was good stuff in here too. The course material is interesting and moves at a robust pace and I do think they have made an effort despite the fact that much of it appears lifted from one PhD student's dissertation. Realistically I would not recommend this course if you don't have a STEM Bachelor's degree and you will likely find it painful if you have been away from your degree more than three years. None of this is bad, although the material would have benefitted by being spread out by perhaps two more weeks as realistically people who have been in the workplace a long time may need more time, and have less time per week with family commitments. Unfortunately there are a number of areas that need work: 1 - Inconsistencies and errors in the material. Certain unexplained suffixes in equations and worse, changes in the suffixes without indication that they changed or what they are. I don't feel that this was particularly widespread but it did result in some loss of confidence in the course and time being wasted "interpreting" 2 - Tests throughout the course that often provide the relatively limited feedback of "correct well done" or worse I'm sorry to say, the relatively useless feedback "sorry that is not correct", without ANY explanation of why it was correct or more importantly what an incorrect answer should have been and why. I can understand that this will hopefully drive students should do more research, but if they hit a wall, realistically they're going to keep iterating on the answers until you pass and learn nothing because of the time pressure to complete by the end of the week. I wonder if there is a better mechanism that can be used here 3 - TA Support - The lack of TA support coupled with some concern about a history of errors led the students to believe that there was an error in week 3. For 10 days students went back and forth debating which one of the two equations that were supposedly doing the same thing but with missing terms were correct. NOT ONCE did a TA wake up and step in. In the end one of the students flagged the video as "inappropriate" to wake the UPenn organization up. The TA then stepped in and said (I paraphrase) "oh, we just dropped those terms because they're not so important, but we didn't mention that..." If you are not going to adequately support the students, the material had better be bullet-proof and show some linear thinking 4 - The last exam. Keep in mind if you do this course, you had better be comfortable with calculus, linear algebra, vector math/mechanics and it would be helpful to have a head start in Matlab. That said, the last question in the last exam, was an order of magnitude more challenging than everything else set and almost felt like a "shake out" question. I passed the course and had a good understanding of the material, but I suspect that the folks that did, made it through that last question in multiple random fashions. The material itself is relatively academic and the trajectory topic was definitely so. Unfortunately the one example (jerk trajectory) provided appears to have left a lot of students feeling very unsupported based on feedback I saw, and would probably benefit from having an example more fully worked through. As for the final exam, it would be highly desirable for UPenn to provide insight into how they would have solved the last part of the last question as my concern is that there is a whole contingent of people who did this course who didn't come away with as good a grounding on trajectories as they may believe they have | need more time, and have less | Time | per week with family commitments. Unfortunately | Positive | 0.79 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A tough score, which I have mixed feelings about as there was good stuff in here too. The course material is interesting and moves at a robust pace and I do think they have made an effort despite the fact that much of it appears lifted from one PhD student's dissertation. Realistically I would not recommend this course if you don't have a STEM Bachelor's degree and you will likely find it painful if you have been away from your degree more than three years. None of this is bad, although the material would have benefitted by being spread out by perhaps two more weeks as realistically people who have been in the workplace a long time may need more time, and have less time per week with family commitments. Unfortunately there are a number of areas that need work: 1 - Inconsistencies and errors in the material. Certain unexplained suffixes in equations and worse, changes in the suffixes without indication that they changed or what they are. I don't feel that this was particularly widespread but it did result in some loss of confidence in the course and time being wasted "interpreting" 2 - Tests throughout the course that often provide the relatively limited feedback of "correct well done" or worse I'm sorry to say, the relatively useless feedback "sorry that is not correct", without ANY explanation of why it was correct or more importantly what an incorrect answer should have been and why. I can understand that this will hopefully drive students should do more research, but if they hit a wall, realistically they're going to keep iterating on the answers until you pass and learn nothing because of the time pressure to complete by the end of the week. I wonder if there is a better mechanism that can be used here 3 - TA Support - The lack of TA support coupled with some concern about a history of errors led the students to believe that there was an error in week 3. For 10 days students went back and forth debating which one of the two equations that were supposedly doing the same thing but with missing terms were correct. NOT ONCE did a TA wake up and step in. In the end one of the students flagged the video as "inappropriate" to wake the UPenn organization up. The TA then stepped in and said (I paraphrase) "oh, we just dropped those terms because they're not so important, but we didn't mention that..." If you are not going to adequately support the students, the material had better be bullet-proof and show some linear thinking 4 - The last exam. Keep in mind if you do this course, you had better be comfortable with calculus, linear algebra, vector math/mechanics and it would be helpful to have a head start in Matlab. That said, the last question in the last exam, was an order of magnitude more challenging than everything else set and almost felt like a "shake out" question. I passed the course and had a good understanding of the material, but I suspect that the folks that did, made it through that last question in multiple random fashions. The material itself is relatively academic and the trajectory topic was definitely so. Unfortunately the one example (jerk trajectory) provided appears to have left a lot of students feeling very unsupported based on feedback I saw, and would probably benefit from having an example more fully worked through. As for the final exam, it would be highly desirable for UPenn to provide insight into how they would have solved the last part of the last question as my concern is that there is a whole contingent of people who did this course who didn't come away with as good a grounding on trajectories as they may believe they have | of confidence in the course and | Time | being wasted " interpreting" 2 - | Negative | 0.91 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A tough score, which I have mixed feelings about as there was good stuff in here too. The course material is interesting and moves at a robust pace and I do think they have made an effort despite the fact that much of it appears lifted from one PhD student's dissertation. Realistically I would not recommend this course if you don't have a STEM Bachelor's degree and you will likely find it painful if you have been away from your degree more than three years. None of this is bad, although the material would have benefitted by being spread out by perhaps two more weeks as realistically people who have been in the workplace a long time may need more time, and have less time per week with family commitments. Unfortunately there are a number of areas that need work: 1 - Inconsistencies and errors in the material. Certain unexplained suffixes in equations and worse, changes in the suffixes without indication that they changed or what they are. I don't feel that this was particularly widespread but it did result in some loss of confidence in the course and time being wasted "interpreting" 2 - Tests throughout the course that often provide the relatively limited feedback of "correct well done" or worse I'm sorry to say, the relatively useless feedback "sorry that is not correct", without ANY explanation of why it was correct or more importantly what an incorrect answer should have been and why. I can understand that this will hopefully drive students should do more research, but if they hit a wall, realistically they're going to keep iterating on the answers until you pass and learn nothing because of the time pressure to complete by the end of the week. I wonder if there is a better mechanism that can be used here 3 - TA Support - The lack of TA support coupled with some concern about a history of errors led the students to believe that there was an error in week 3. For 10 days students went back and forth debating which one of the two equations that were supposedly doing the same thing but with missing terms were correct. NOT ONCE did a TA wake up and step in. In the end one of the students flagged the video as "inappropriate" to wake the UPenn organization up. The TA then stepped in and said (I paraphrase) "oh, we just dropped those terms because they're not so important, but we didn't mention that..." If you are not going to adequately support the students, the material had better be bullet-proof and show some linear thinking 4 - The last exam. Keep in mind if you do this course, you had better be comfortable with calculus, linear algebra, vector math/mechanics and it would be helpful to have a head start in Matlab. That said, the last question in the last exam, was an order of magnitude more challenging than everything else set and almost felt like a "shake out" question. I passed the course and had a good understanding of the material, but I suspect that the folks that did, made it through that last question in multiple random fashions. The material itself is relatively academic and the trajectory topic was definitely so. Unfortunately the one example (jerk trajectory) provided appears to have left a lot of students feeling very unsupported based on feedback I saw, and would probably benefit from having an example more fully worked through. As for the final exam, it would be highly desirable for UPenn to provide insight into how they would have solved the last part of the last question as my concern is that there is a whole contingent of people who did this course who didn't come away with as good a grounding on trajectories as they may believe they have | and learn nothing because of the | Time | pressure to complete by the end | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | the course and the lessons are really interesting and the professor is explaining really well. Especially nice are all the videos demonstrating what have been done so far. Problem are the assignments: -all the assignments are about controlling a quadrotor, but a matlab code 95% done is already provided and most of the times the only thing requested is to spend days in find (randomly) the correct values for the controller gains; -the last assignment is again partly about (randomly) looking for gain values and partly about generating a trajectory as a piecewise 7th order polynomial, where the method for creating such thing is only mentioned in the assignment pdf and with wrong conditions. Even with the correct conditions, with a previous knowledge of numerical methods you can go through it, but otherwise it takes quite some time; -the grade is not set properly.. you either take 0points or the maximum, meaning that for just passing the assignment you have the same difficulty as getting full marks.. if you arrive (after days of trial and error) to the point of passing the assignment, then you can easily get full grade with small changes.. which makes no sense; -the explanatory pdf for the assignments or the provided codes some times contain errors, and I don't understand why they are not fixed considering that this course is already the second time that was provided; -the assignments are fully based on matlab and to actually understand something it is required quite a deep knowledge of how to use it.. I work daily with matlab and had some difficulties in following what it is done. If somebody is new to matlab, it will be quite difficult to do even the easier tasks; -the evaluation function for the last assignment is extremely slow.. it took me 40minutes to evaluate the results.. and considering the many iterations usually required for (randomly) finding the gains this really doesn't help. Summarising I am quite happy about this course and glad to have done it, but please fix the many problems in the assignments. I have taken many courses online in different platforms and this was so far the most time consuming one.. | already provided and most of the | Time | the only thing requested is to | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | the course and the lessons are really interesting and the professor is explaining really well. Especially nice are all the videos demonstrating what have been done so far. Problem are the assignments: -all the assignments are about controlling a quadrotor, but a matlab code 95% done is already provided and most of the times the only thing requested is to spend days in find (randomly) the correct values for the controller gains; -the last assignment is again partly about (randomly) looking for gain values and partly about generating a trajectory as a piecewise 7th order polynomial, where the method for creating such thing is only mentioned in the assignment pdf and with wrong conditions. Even with the correct conditions, with a previous knowledge of numerical methods you can go through it, but otherwise it takes quite some time; -the grade is not set properly.. you either take 0points or the maximum, meaning that for just passing the assignment you have the same difficulty as getting full marks.. if you arrive (after days of trial and error) to the point of passing the assignment, then you can easily get full grade with small changes.. which makes no sense; -the explanatory pdf for the assignments or the provided codes some times contain errors, and I don't understand why they are not fixed considering that this course is already the second time that was provided; -the assignments are fully based on matlab and to actually understand something it is required quite a deep knowledge of how to use it.. I work daily with matlab and had some difficulties in following what it is done. If somebody is new to matlab, it will be quite difficult to do even the easier tasks; -the evaluation function for the last assignment is extremely slow.. it took me 40minutes to evaluate the results.. and considering the many iterations usually required for (randomly) finding the gains this really doesn't help. Summarising I am quite happy about this course and glad to have done it, but please fix the many problems in the assignments. I have taken many courses online in different platforms and this was so far the most time consuming one.. | assignments or the provided codes some | Time | contain errors, and I don't understand | Negative | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | the course and the lessons are really interesting and the professor is explaining really well. Especially nice are all the videos demonstrating what have been done so far. Problem are the assignments: -all the assignments are about controlling a quadrotor, but a matlab code 95% done is already provided and most of the times the only thing requested is to spend days in find (randomly) the correct values for the controller gains; -the last assignment is again partly about (randomly) looking for gain values and partly about generating a trajectory as a piecewise 7th order polynomial, where the method for creating such thing is only mentioned in the assignment pdf and with wrong conditions. Even with the correct conditions, with a previous knowledge of numerical methods you can go through it, but otherwise it takes quite some time; -the grade is not set properly.. you either take 0points or the maximum, meaning that for just passing the assignment you have the same difficulty as getting full marks.. if you arrive (after days of trial and error) to the point of passing the assignment, then you can easily get full grade with small changes.. which makes no sense; -the explanatory pdf for the assignments or the provided codes some times contain errors, and I don't understand why they are not fixed considering that this course is already the second time that was provided; -the assignments are fully based on matlab and to actually understand something it is required quite a deep knowledge of how to use it.. I work daily with matlab and had some difficulties in following what it is done. If somebody is new to matlab, it will be quite difficult to do even the easier tasks; -the evaluation function for the last assignment is extremely slow.. it took me 40minutes to evaluate the results.. and considering the many iterations usually required for (randomly) finding the gains this really doesn't help. Summarising I am quite happy about this course and glad to have done it, but please fix the many problems in the assignments. I have taken many courses online in different platforms and this was so far the most time consuming one.. | this course is already the second | Time | that was provided; -the assignments are | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | the course and the lessons are really interesting and the professor is explaining really well. Especially nice are all the videos demonstrating what have been done so far. Problem are the assignments: -all the assignments are about controlling a quadrotor, but a matlab code 95% done is already provided and most of the times the only thing requested is to spend days in find (randomly) the correct values for the controller gains; -the last assignment is again partly about (randomly) looking for gain values and partly about generating a trajectory as a piecewise 7th order polynomial, where the method for creating such thing is only mentioned in the assignment pdf and with wrong conditions. Even with the correct conditions, with a previous knowledge of numerical methods you can go through it, but otherwise it takes quite some time; -the grade is not set properly.. you either take 0points or the maximum, meaning that for just passing the assignment you have the same difficulty as getting full marks.. if you arrive (after days of trial and error) to the point of passing the assignment, then you can easily get full grade with small changes.. which makes no sense; -the explanatory pdf for the assignments or the provided codes some times contain errors, and I don't understand why they are not fixed considering that this course is already the second time that was provided; -the assignments are fully based on matlab and to actually understand something it is required quite a deep knowledge of how to use it.. I work daily with matlab and had some difficulties in following what it is done. If somebody is new to matlab, it will be quite difficult to do even the easier tasks; -the evaluation function for the last assignment is extremely slow.. it took me 40minutes to evaluate the results.. and considering the many iterations usually required for (randomly) finding the gains this really doesn't help. Summarising I am quite happy about this course and glad to have done it, but please fix the many problems in the assignments. I have taken many courses online in different platforms and this was so far the most time consuming one.. | this was so far the most | Time | consuming one. . | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| 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. | couldn't complete the final assignment in | Time | was incredibly stressful and unfair. The | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 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. | debug something by guesswork on a | Time | limit is not a valuable educational | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The course is interesting and entertaining at times, though seems relatively undercooked. Typos in video lectures and assignment writeups are still frequent. The course content is a bit rushed, with some rather difficult aspects left almost unexplained. Definitely not for begginers, as some knowledge of physics, differential equations, calculus, matlab programming is highly recommended! | course is interesting and entertaining at | Time | though seems relatively undercooked. Typos in | Positive | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | My feeling is that the course creator(s) did not fully prepare and scope of the course materials (i.e., lectures, supporting artifacts, assignments) required for the available time alloted to each week's topic. No syllubus or suggested reading material was available until the course started, which leaves little time to decide on the value of the course or to acquire the reading materials. The lectures glossed over topics that where only minimally supported by brief supplementary lectures provided by the teaching assistants. At the start of the course the lectures and sparse supporting material were only available in video format; not very conducive for detailed review. The student population had to beg for electronic copies of the materials, which became available around the end of the second week of the four week session. The assignments say they require 3 hours, but I would venture to say that most students have spent way more than 3 hours on the assignments just in researching solutions let alone debugging supplied software along with their portion of the assignment. In summary, the topics were interesting however the organization and supporting materials were lacking making for an unsatisfying learning experience. | artifacts, assignments) required for the available | Time | alloted to each week's topic. No | Positive | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | My feeling is that the course creator(s) did not fully prepare and scope of the course materials (i.e., lectures, supporting artifacts, assignments) required for the available time alloted to each week's topic. No syllubus or suggested reading material was available until the course started, which leaves little time to decide on the value of the course or to acquire the reading materials. The lectures glossed over topics that where only minimally supported by brief supplementary lectures provided by the teaching assistants. At the start of the course the lectures and sparse supporting material were only available in video format; not very conducive for detailed review. The student population had to beg for electronic copies of the materials, which became available around the end of the second week of the four week session. The assignments say they require 3 hours, but I would venture to say that most students have spent way more than 3 hours on the assignments just in researching solutions let alone debugging supplied software along with their portion of the assignment. In summary, the topics were interesting however the organization and supporting materials were lacking making for an unsatisfying learning experience. | the course started, which leaves little | Time | to decide on the value of | Positive | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was not a beginning level course as advertised. Test cases for assignments were neither document nor otherwise explained within the course materials. Quizzes during the lecture were often unrelated to the material just presented or were given before the relevant material was taught. The course creators obviously put a lot of time and effort into this course. So it is difficult for me to write such a critical review. However, they missed the mark with this one enough that I can't recommend the course. Unfortunately I will not be completing this course only due to the fact that I have run out of time and patience to complete the last assignment. | creators obviously put a lot of | Time | and effort into this course. So | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was not a beginning level course as advertised. Test cases for assignments were neither document nor otherwise explained within the course materials. Quizzes during the lecture were often unrelated to the material just presented or were given before the relevant material was taught. The course creators obviously put a lot of time and effort into this course. So it is difficult for me to write such a critical review. However, they missed the mark with this one enough that I can't recommend the course. Unfortunately I will not be completing this course only due to the fact that I have run out of time and patience to complete the last assignment. | that I have run out of | Time | and patience to complete the last | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I loved the course, it was way beyond my expectations. Everything well explained. I only have on critic. I think the assignment of 5 waypoints trajectory was not in accordance with the rest of the course. Imagine the tests following a level line and abruptly changes to something too hard. I think the purpose here is to learn and not find out people with special skills. Many of our colleagues that were following the course simple gave up due to this assignment. And also took 25 hours average for many of us, that not dispose of this time, since the proposed time to complete the tasks are of three hours. | us, that not dispose of this | Time | since the proposed time to complete | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I loved the course, it was way beyond my expectations. Everything well explained. I only have on critic. I think the assignment of 5 waypoints trajectory was not in accordance with the rest of the course. Imagine the tests following a level line and abruptly changes to something too hard. I think the purpose here is to learn and not find out people with special skills. Many of our colleagues that were following the course simple gave up due to this assignment. And also took 25 hours average for many of us, that not dispose of this time, since the proposed time to complete the tasks are of three hours. | of this time, since the proposed | Time | to complete the tasks are of | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | So close but yet so far ... Course concepts are interesting and the programming assignments are fun but the presentation can be greatly improved. Criticisms include: (i) The course isn't self contained. Physical concepts like 'resultant moment', 'inertial and body-fixed frame' and 'torque' are used without definition. Mechanics is not listed as a prerequisite but it should be. (ii) Lectures are very mathematical but proofs, intuition and good problem sets are all missing. Listening to a math lecture without doing challenging problems or deriving mathematical results to build intuition can be a waste of time. Check out John Cochrane's Asset Pricing 1 and 2 or Tim Roughgarden's Algo 1 and 2 for great examples of thoughtful problem sets and intuitive derivations. (iii) Way too much powerpoint! Speed reading a static powerpoint slide overloaded with dense mathematical formulas without using pointers or animations to focus the students attention is a recipe for confusion and frustration. I find hand written derivations, even when the handwriting is a little sloppy, much easier to follow than a static page of formulas plus a sound track. Hand written derivations impose a natural pace and focal point to the content. Check out Gilbert Strang's Linear Algebra, Sebastian Thrun's Artificial Intelligence for Robotics and Andrew Ng's Machine Learning for examples of good derivations of mathematically sophisticated material. (iv) The programming assignments while fun were somewhat ad hoc and disconnected from the lecture material, specifically, the main task of every single assignment was to hand tune a pd controller. No systematic approach was ever described for performing this task. | intuition can be a waste of | Time | Check out John Cochrane's Asset Pricing | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | All in all the material, videos and assignments were very interesting and they made up an exciting course. However, some of the slides lacked sufficient information on notions or did not make references to supplementary sources. The assignment material (mainly pdfs) sometimes had typos which made solving them a bit confusing and more time consuming without actually being very difficult. Also for both slides and assignments the notations were not always consistent and/or variables disappeared from equations without clear explanations. I hope in the next offering of this course there will be improvements on these aspects. | them a bit confusing and more | Time | consuming without actually being very difficult. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Quizzes and Assignments are poorly designed. You will spend most of your time tuning parameters and deriving matrices that were never discussed in the course. Unfortunate. | You will spend most of your | Time | tuning parameters and deriving matrices that | Negative | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Good course overall, since I took it the first time it was offered it was still not quite polished. I liked the focus on quadrocopter simulation and creating controllers. I think it would benefit from more specific discussion forums for quizzes/assignments, being able to view past quiz attempts, and cleaning up typos/errors in the material. | since I took it the first | Time | it was offered it was still | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Overall good course that would definitely make you spend more time reading and learning on the side. Would recommend it those who have good background in college level math like Linear Algebra and a little bit of Robotics Background from a Math perspective - like working with translations, rotations, transformation matrices of that sort to make the transition easier. (There are basic robotic courses online to help with that, like Peter Corke's course). But overall this course requires some significant effort to explore the material from an external perspective. Some issues however - 1. Lack of added resources like reading material to support the course and help advanced students go beyond the course themselves. 2. Severe lack of activity from TA(s) on the forums. It's good that students get to interact among themselves and learn on their own, but every single post should be either answered by a TA to clarify doubts or they should acknowledge that another student's explanation was good enough to answer a particular question. 3. The in-video quizzes weren't up-to-the-mark as per me. One question asked "why" and the answer was literally "because that's how that algorithm is". 4. This is a trend in MOOCs and I don't think it can be helped, but perhaps more assignments that help understand the concepts better with examples would help students go beyond. If this course had such optional assignments that would be great for understanding the concepts with a more hands-on approach. But this is probably not the best platform to do so. Overall would recommend future iterations of this course, especially if the first two points above are improved upon. | would definitely make you spend more | Time | reading and learning on the side. | Positive | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | One of the most useful courses, if you are planning to study robotics seriously. This course covers very important theoretical material, which you probably never find in internet in compact form. You should prepare your mind, because this course requires careful attention, and deep comprehension. If you just a beginner, you should be ready to see a lot of math and mechanics, because this is a real robotics. But if you truly like robotics, and specially, aerial robotics, this course for you. Personally for me - this is a course, which I was looking for a long time | I was looking for a long | Time | | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course was very good and very interesting. The teacher explained things well. The BIG problem with the course is that the level of the lectures no way matched the level of the assignments, especially the last one. It was way too hard compared to the material presented. It was supposed to take 3 hours but it took me more like 50 hours. And from the forum it seems like a lot of people spend 40 or more hours on this one last problem. Was too hard and too much. A lot of prayer and sweat I finally got it with a lot if discussion on the forums. But 40 hours for one problem is crazy. There needed to be a lot more thorough instruction in order to do this problem in a reasonable time. | do this problem in a reasonable | Time | | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | This course feels like a bad news anchorman reading the teleprompter. It gives a lot of formulae without proper explanations. A lot of quiz answers do not come from the video lectures. The course is really just spitting formulae from the dissertation "Trajectory Generation and Control for Quadrotors" by Daniel Warren Mellinger (easily found using search engines). Reading the dissertation before doing the course would probably help understand the formulae they say out of context without the proper explanations. Sorry for the bad review, it's the first time I leave one like that, although I've completed many MOOCs. I hope it will help to improve the course. | the bad review, it's the first | Time | I leave one like that, although | Positive | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I'd like to say a big thank you for Professor Kumar for putting this together. I work full time and in my spare time some of my friends are thinking about building a in-house small quadrotor with 3-D printed parts and rasberry pi & basic camara. The information of this course is very, very useful and the Matlab practices and assignments are challenging and interesting. Not to mention this course has successfully pulled me away from my favorite video game...a remarkable achievement. I hope that the notation in the videos and in the assignments could be more clear as that can cause confusion. | putting this together. I work full | Time | and in my spare time some | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I'd like to say a big thank you for Professor Kumar for putting this together. I work full time and in my spare time some of my friends are thinking about building a in-house small quadrotor with 3-D printed parts and rasberry pi & basic camara. The information of this course is very, very useful and the Matlab practices and assignments are challenging and interesting. Not to mention this course has successfully pulled me away from my favorite video game...a remarkable achievement. I hope that the notation in the videos and in the assignments could be more clear as that can cause confusion. | full time and in my spare | Time | some of my friends are thinking | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Great course. Initiate you to review much of your math and engineering control knowledge by specific problems. This is more of an application course, you see the application, the math behind and use Matlab to program certain situation. Beware, it's a one month course so they don't spend time to walk you through the basic math, some specific terms are explained during the lecture but not all, a reference for some Control book maybe needed to know what are those terms. If you have no knowledge in these area, some supplemental material maybe provided but be ready to learn and explore more on your own. | month course so they don't spend | Time | to walk you through the basic | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Overall a good course. But I would suggest the following updates: -there are many formulas in the course that are not explained, just dropped in the slides -there are many inconsistencies in notations (for instance the Kv, Kp used sometimes, other times Kd and Kp) -programming labs should be given in an incremental approach; ex. instead of just requesting a full solution for a given problem, a stepwise approach where the functions are built up to produce intermediate results and slowly add complexity to reach that final goal is much more efficient as a learning tool -supplementary notes are not available -slides for the main lectures are available but they are attached to the videos; it would be better if they are added as an item in the course outline. Many other courses on Coursera do the same thing. Also it would spare the presenter to break down the slide pack into parts corresponding to the videos; just place the whole slide pack for a lesson. | the Kv, Kp used sometimes, other | Time | Kd and Kp) -programming labs should | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I have a Maths background, but last time I studied Maths was 23 years back. Despite that, the course structure allowed me to catch-up and make sense of the whole class as an experimenter and hacker. Glad I started it. | have a Maths background, but last | Time | I studied Maths was 23 years | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | I truly love the course program and what it covers. And aiding student who can't afford the price by grants is relly nice. Then were students alloweed to download MATLAB freely! But teachers should be clear from the begining, what topics one must grasp before getting one's head into it. I don't think calculus and Linear algebra is enough, given some topics that are spoken about in the course. The teacher can explain mean things and in a second, speaks about totally incomprehensibe subject. Last but not least, I personally think the course lacks on additional materials. It would be really nice if there was something like handouts, pdf readings for deeper understanding of the concepts on offline times. | understanding of the concepts on offline | Time | | Positive | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | So far the best course available online, almost research level. I have never done anything UAV, but I am a researcher for many years. I finish the material within 1 week (not full time). I assume it would be possible for average senior undergraduate student to finish with 4 weeks of intensive study. | material within 1 week (not full | Time | I assume it would be possible | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| jIaMzuYjEeWomRIq0eOZbw | This course offers a comprehensive description of all the steps required for the analysis of brain images. The notes are clear, concise, and contain a lot of helpful information about reading medical images, pre-processing them, and visualizing them. I'm a statistics researcher, and had very limited prior experience on this topic; but feel that this course has helped me tremendously to acquire the knowledge necessary to dive into research in this area, in a very short time. However, the benefits of taking this class go beyond this. Specifically, I was thrilled to be able to apply the techniques described here to read and visualize in R, medical images (MRI) concerning a patient-friend diagnosed with brain tumor, obtained directly from the doctor's office !!! And this, I thought, was amazing! | this area, in a very short | Time | However, the benefits of taking this | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| jlAy87ZEEeWddwqLXioIgw | The applications were too time consuming. Please consider adding a tool that makes graphing easier. The course itself was very good and engaging and without us knowing it, would teach core fundamentals of computing through the coding exercises. | The applications were too | Time | consuming. Please consider adding a tool | Negative | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| jlAy87ZEEeWddwqLXioIgw | I found the material of this course to be very enlightening, it's not too difficult if you have the appropriate background. However, it will take a decent amount of time to fully complete. As part of the specialization, all of the skills I've learned were consolidated and put to an interesting use with this class. | will take a decent amount of | Time | to fully complete. As part of | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| K0cCzBtHEeWsqgoIBu2JdQ | sir, could you pl. include some real time problems or natural phenomena while explaining a concept | could you pl. include some real | Time | problems or natural phenomena while explaining | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| K28H5jJ0EeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Assignments are good-intended, but I am not sure how helpful they are, as they are really boring and unnecessarily time-consuming. I do not know how could one make them better. In contrast, the videos are really good, they are worth your time even if you know your way around these things. | really good, they are worth your | Time | even if you know your way | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | Interesting, could be more didactic next time. Props. | Interesting, could be more didactic next | Time | Props. | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | Professor Kellogg does a great job of including a personal touch and weaving a storyline through his lecture that keeps you engaged his course material. This class was a great starting point, gives a great sense of important aspects of music business as a whole, and was a reasonable time commitment. | a whole, and was a reasonable | Time | commitment. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | I loved this course! I learned so much about the music business, more than I learned as being a part of it as an artist roughly about the same time that Mr. Kellogg was working as an artist. Things have changed a lot and this course made me think about how it might change even more in the future and if there might be a place for an "older doll" like me. John Kellogg is a great teacher. He sited real experiences, and that's what made things stick for me. Thank you Coursera for a great course! | an artist roughly about the same | Time | that Mr. Kellogg was working as | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| k8B9WjxkEeW7GArkqhNhJw | The subject of this course is awesome and very interesting. But the effort that Berklee put into it is nothing compared to what they give to students, on their official website. I completed a Certificate with Berklee online and I do not recommend this course - but I do recommend Berklee Online courses, with written lessons and interactive works! P.s.: the videos stop all the time and this makes it harder to follow what the teacher is saying! | : the videos stop all the | Time | and this makes it harder to | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Great introduction-- not a single lesson was lacking. Professor Noor is engaging, feels approachable (even behind a screen), and I found the class appropriately challenging. There were times I felt I completely grasped the "important" parts of lectures only to begin a quiz and realize that I didn't. The quizzes really helped me to see that I had to understand much more about how to apply the messages to other situations, or compound scenarios. Good lesson in logic. Computation also matters in this course, which can be tough for someone more used to reading pop-science analyses. I appreciated being held accountable and learned far more than I would if I'd just read a book. | the class appropriately challenging. There were | Time | I felt I completely grasped the | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Be aware that the beginning overview lectures of this course are radically different than the detailed lectures that come later. The beginning of this course should be sent to anyone that ever tells you that evolution is not a "thing": :D After that, be prepared to do a lot of listening to Big A little a and minutia about how genetics really works. This is a really good course.... not perfect, but really good. One star is removed because I think I would have preferred a bit more development and overview of the "bigger picture" (I fell asleep at times). I sometimes lost the concepts that I was interested in learning through the barrage of details, but for someone who is very seriously studying the subject, then it would be 5 stars. Prof Noor is a good speaker: clear and has a nice voice and personality. | bigger picture" (I fell asleep at | Time | I sometimes lost the concepts that | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Provides information from basic laws of inheritance to understanding the field of Evolutionary biology and genome sequencing. Explained in a 'light and easy to understand' way! Not a course you can pass by knowing a few facts about the subjects. Tricky at times, which help you find out if you understood everything correctly. Would recommend to others! | facts about the subjects. Tricky at | Time | which help you find out if | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | I found this course very well taught. Especially the lectures wre conceived in a way that it was entertaining and challeging at the same time. Coming for a social science background myself, I was delighted by the way the course eased people from outside the subject area into the field. Additionally, I was able to to do the course without it conflicitng with my job (in my case it actually helped my own research in social science, which made even mor eof a success for me). Prof. Noor did a great job in teaching without overburden and keeping a light tone while making me learn. Only one minor problem: Having never encountered multiple choice during my academic career, I was sometimes thrown off by the wording of questions and answers. I know it is hard to creat quiz-formats that are not based on multiple choice, but it would maybe make the course more comprehensive, i there were. Since this is likely to be a problem with my own experience and does not affect others so much, I would not go as far as deducing anything. A future wish: Maybe a course on the subject, specialising in some subareas based on this course woudl be great. All in all, Prof. Noor and his team did a good job in conceiving and conducting this course. | entertaining and challeging at the same | Time | Coming for a social science background | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | This course is so informative that I'm doing it for a second time. This is the best Coursera course I've taken. | I'm doing it for a second | Time | This is the best Coursera course | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Excellent class, and an even better interface now that it changed to always available. Prof. Noor explains with such clarity that even a 5 year old can learn about DNA. This is my 2nd time taking this class, and I've seen already many positive changes in this 1st week alone. Thank you Coursera, Duke University, all participants in general, and a very special thank you to Prof. Noor, your contagious love for science spreads like wild fire. | about DNA. This is my 2nd | Time | taking this class, and I've seen | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | A very good course. Need time to be completed. It should continue on and lectures should be available every time regarless of end of quizez or assignments. | A very good course. Need | Time | to be completed. It should continue | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | A very good course. Need time to be completed. It should continue on and lectures should be available every time regarless of end of quizez or assignments. | and lectures should be available every | Time | regarless of end of quizez or | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| kbmiwPT-EeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | My favorite course of all time.. It has a lot of interesting concepts and a fascinating perspective on this weird thing the world/society is. | My favorite course of all | Time | . It has a lot of | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| kcW15H3JEeWKYwric11Hpw | Excellent! Time consuming and difficult but excellent! | Excellent! | Time | consuming and difficult but excellent! | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| kcW15H3JEeWKYwric11Hpw | Very good! I think week 4 was very time consuming, in contrast with week 3, that was very light. Maybe these contents can be better balanced in the fuute. | I think week 4 was very | Time | consuming, in contrast with week 3, | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| kE5iqkuTEeWyUw4oVjG8nQ | Dear sir, its great to study with you Can i have a favor please, Can i have a hard copy certificate from NUS, it's sad because i want to learn this course because i love NUS a lot, can you give me a favor please, it will be more meaningful to me to spend time and try my best to pass all 5 modules | more meaningful to me to spend | Time | and try my best to pass | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| kKyRFEEiEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | I totally love learning about productivity and time management | totally love learning about productivity and | Time | management | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| kKyRFEEiEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | I recommend this course, helps us to better manage our time in work and personal life. | helps us to better manage our | Time | in work and personal life. | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| kKyRFEEiEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | Pauta muy concretas y efectivas si se ponen en práctica. Thank you so much for your time. | Thank you so much for your | Time | | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | I learned some important concepts, but all of the material was repeated many times. If the redundancy of information were eliminated, imagine how much more students of this course could learn! | of the material was repeated many | Time | If the redundancy of information were | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | this is an amazing course and there is a lot to learn. the course director took his time to explain things for even a layman to understant. Perfect course with perfect lectures. I loved every aspect of it. | learn. the course director took his | Time | to explain things for even a | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| koPOOn1dEeWKYwric11Hpw | I've had this course 'IMC' 4 times in my college. This time was way much better. This course is practically amazing as we see each concept being applied to the ground work. and that's so exciting, we really benefit and see how the real work looks like. i'd highly recommend it. | I've had this course 'IMC' 4 | Time | in my college. This time was | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| koPOOn1dEeWKYwric11Hpw | I've had this course 'IMC' 4 times in my college. This time was way much better. This course is practically amazing as we see each concept being applied to the ground work. and that's so exciting, we really benefit and see how the real work looks like. i'd highly recommend it. | 4 times in my college. This | Time | was way much better. This course | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The content in this course was invaluable and I learned a lot from the instructor videos, guest lectures and assignments. It's already changed the way I am doing business. My one complaint is with the grading system - and this is on Coursera and not on the course. I can't understand first why a peer graded assignment is considered late when I submitted it on time, and it's not my fault that others hadn't reviewed it yet. Similarly on a quiz, there were points given for answers that were supposed to be skipped if you had done the assignment. Therefore, the highest grade you could get on that quiz was a 57%. While passing was a 1%, it's still averaged into my final grade as a 57%. That doesn't make any sense at all. | late when I submitted it on | Time | and it's not my fault that | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | There are no clearly defined learning outcomes at the start of each video which are cramped with stats and facts and statements such as "you will learn more about this in mooc 2" and "this will be talked about extensively in mooc 3". As a learner its confusing to know what to take out of each video. The extend to which students are used to promote the course by prompting them to tweet about the videos is a concern. Ones or twice is okay. But every time? The assignment is a miss - students should be given a choice whether they want to focus on marketing their professional personas or marketing their business. I can summarize MOOC 1 in one sentence. Social Media is big and therefore business must change the way they do marketing. | or twice is okay. But every | Time | The assignment is a miss - | Negative | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This was a great introduction course. I have been researching social media for quite some time and most of the information learned was new to me. | researching social media for quite some | Time | and most of the information learned | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | A very good introduction when you are a total learner in this field! For those who already have some expertise it is good to up to date!! I did enjoy it despite my lack of time :-) | enjoy it despite my lack of | Time | :-) | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I really enjoyed this course but it really is more of an introduction to the rest of the specialisation. A lot was repeated over and over which seemed a little tedious at times but in actuality, it made sure I really understood and clearly processed the most important information. Looking forward to the next course! | which seemed a little tedious at | Time | but in actuality, it made sure | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Great introduction! I really feel like I learned a lot and am looking forward to going through with the rest of the courses in this specialization. The only thing I wasn't a fan of was the peer-reviewed assignment. I felt I didn't really get enough peer feedback. Other than that, I thought everything else was great. The videos were very informative. It didn't take up a lot of my free time and I felt a sense of accomplishment when the course was completed. | up a lot of my free | Time | and I felt a sense of | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | this course at the end was very helpful to as I didn't know a lot of sites that can help me with managing my time & also my social | can help me with managing my | Time | & also my social | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I love this course and the instructors. I am learning so much. The only thing i would change is to make sure papers from peers are marked in a timely manner. I have marked three papers, and have not had a single person mark mine. I hope this will not affect my ability to certify for your specialty, as i am really enjoying my time here. | as i am really enjoying my | Time | here. | Negative | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course is quite short (videos are usually only 3-7 minutes long) and therefore could be completed very quickly and/or need quite little time investment. I did not like that they do not have any written materials cause at some points they go over written slides very quickly and it is tricky to follow and understand. On the other hand, there is a lot of repeats and therefore you will understand everything in the end. | very quickly and/or need quite little | Time | investment. I did not like that | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| KqKtbzXyEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I really loved this course for three reasons: (1) It was clearly designed for an online audience (as opposed to a recording of a University lecture); (2) it offered good, relevant, clearly-presented information in a concise way, including guest lectures by topical experts; and (3) it was relevant and useful to my current business needs. It met and possibly exceeded my expectations. I was able to glean helpful information and sources without being overwhelming in terms of time expenditure. | without being overwhelming in terms of | Time | expenditure. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| KuL4QMbGEeWQSAqHNmfP4Q | This specialization has been nothing short of awesome. This exam really caps it off on a high note. Not only the quizzes were challenging and interesting, they are also very relevant to all the concepts learnt throughout the specialization. The exam consists of a good mix of conceptual, algorithmic, debugging, optimization problems, graph modelling and mathematical computation problems. The very tight time frame of only a few weeks with only 1 single attempt each week forced me to be very careful with my solutions and double check my work carefully before submitting. The only thing that I wish to see is that this exam should be 2 exams instead of just 1 exam. I sort of still hunger for more challenging exercises like this exam. I really hope that this capstone exam course sets a good example for other Coursera courses because challenging mini-exams like this are incredibly valuable tools to validate our knowledge. | mathematical computation problems. The very tight | Time | frame of only a few weeks | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Kz1Vwnd_EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Learned so much in a short time. Thanks for the great course. | Learned so much in a short | Time | Thanks for the great course. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| kzmY_qA-EeWHXAr1OpR7HQ | This course is not meant to stand alone as a single course, rather is a portion of a larger Agile Development course. I'm sure the information included is very informative, but it references information that was included in other courses. The first lessons start with diagrams that are not explained and terms that are not defined (which I presume were probably covered in the first course). Also plenty of references to information from other courses ("Previously we learned" "Remember the example"). Dropped the course, not that I didn't understand it, but rather it was not worth my time to play "catch-up" on my own. Suggest removing this course as a free-standing course, or revising to allow the data/lectures to stand on their own. | rather it was not worth my | Time | to play " catch-up" on my | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| l-VzSGYDEeWq4RLQvtY_lQ | Excellent series of courses. Wish I had done a specialization and had more time to do a better job. Perhaps I will do the Capstone project. | done a specialization and had more | Time | to do a better job. Perhaps | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | A bunch of information condensed in small amount of time | information condensed in small amount of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | No time loss through this course. | No | Time | loss through this course. | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| LANMc0UsEeaJwxI8cURk2w | Great! A bit overwhelming at times with all the images and video footage of AWE and absolute infusion of the life of the Globe and the Universe, so I recommend watching it casually and perhaps slowly, but up to you! | Great! A bit overwhelming at | Time | with all the images and video | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| lf2q-R6UEeSzvSIAC0KYCQ | I found this very informative. The only negative comment was the amount of times Professor suggested students to read his book suggests that the motive of the course is to sell more copies of the book. | negative comment was the amount of | Time | Professor suggested students to read his | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | What a great course for a no-experiments code learner! Absolutely worth my time. | no-experiments code learner! Absolutely worth my | Time | | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Everything they teach is in very good flow and interesting. The question they ask in between the video is also a good one for better understanding. I cannot find more better than this one. It make you want to learn more, watch more. It's my first experience in coursera, everything they do is awesome, like the weekly assignment, time given to complete the task which is make you want to do more........Thumbs up to this course lecture and Coursera team too. | is awesome, like the weekly assignment, | Time | given to complete the task which | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Too easy, please do not repeat the same thing three times, it's just a waste of time and I'm not stupid. It's also too academic and should focus more on how to build real websites. On the bright side, it does give you some basics of HTML, CSS and JavaScript. Instead of this course, I would much more recommend following "HTML, CSS, and Javascript for Web Developers" by Yaakov Chaikin from John Hopkins university, it taught me good foundations + tricks and good practices for professional web front end developers. | not repeat the same thing three | Time | it's just a waste of time | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Too easy, please do not repeat the same thing three times, it's just a waste of time and I'm not stupid. It's also too academic and should focus more on how to build real websites. On the bright side, it does give you some basics of HTML, CSS and JavaScript. Instead of this course, I would much more recommend following "HTML, CSS, and Javascript for Web Developers" by Yaakov Chaikin from John Hopkins university, it taught me good foundations + tricks and good practices for professional web front end developers. | times, it's just a waste of | Time | and I'm not stupid. It's also | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course. However the videos were very boring at times. | the videos were very boring at | Time | | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is a great, quick introduction to HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Professor makes full use of the three weeks (no time wasted in lectures), but it's still a basic introduction. | use of the three weeks (no | Time | wasted in lectures), but it's still | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very good as a first time exposure | Very good as a first | Time | exposure | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course will just give overview and will be easy for only those who have some prior knowledge in programming. Anyone new to programming will have a hard time to get everything. Anyways it was atleast very helpful for me. | to programming will have a hard | Time | to get everything. Anyways it was | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Learned a lot from the course. Really beneficial. Loses a star due to having to mark other people's work - really time consuming! | mark other people's work - really | Time | consuming! | Positive | 0.62 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Professor is really goooood! He explains the material from the slides, just as if you were in an actual class, i.e. he doesn't read from some screen. Assignments are challenging but easy at the same time because you submit the full versions in incremental steps. Good learning experience. However, I feel the course is a bit expensive for a three week period. | challenging but easy at the same | Time | because you submit the full versions | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was very informative for the amount of time given. | very informative for the amount of | Time | given. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Did a nice job presenting and plenty time reviewing the material. | a nice job presenting and plenty | Time | reviewing the material. | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very fun course and clear to understand. I would redo them just for fun but don't have time for that yet! | just for fun but don't have | Time | for that yet! | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Learnt alot but it needs more examples to help with the projects -note i am a total beginner and i think the time needed to study for me is 3x that was is stated. | total beginner and i think the | Time | needed to study for me is | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Some prior knowledge is assumed, but the course does cover everything, although the basics are glanced over very quickly. HTML and Javascript coverage was excellent, but I felt that a little more time could have been spent on more complex CSS. | I felt that a little more | Time | could have been spent on more | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A brilliant course. I had a great time going through the lectures and had fun with the assignments. Thank you for this course. | brilliant course. I had a great | Time | going through the lectures and had | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Quickly covered basic HTML, JS, and CSS. Assignment descriptions were clear. There were a few tricky bits mostly related to styling that were more frustrating than it seems like they should have been, but overall a very good course. However, the project time given for the course is very optimistic, it usually always took much longer. | very good course. However, the project | Time | given for the course is very | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The course covers up all the basics in the most clear way. Definetely worth the time! | most clear way. Definetely worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | great course, sadly i cant finish on time | course, sadly i cant finish on | Time | | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The instructor was great. He was very thorough and I really loved the final project. I had a great time taking this course! | final project. I had a great | Time | taking this course! | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | All the course material is great and helpfull, I had a great time doing this course and learned a lot from it! Thanks to the University of Science and Technology from Hong Kong to provide such an amazing material. | and helpfull, I had a great | Time | doing this course and learned a | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I really love it, but i just don't have that much time for the course. I wish I have more time to spend to learn more from the course (personal time management issue). | i just don't have that much | Time | for the course. I wish I | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I really love it, but i just don't have that much time for the course. I wish I have more time to spend to learn more from the course (personal time management issue). | course. I wish I have more | Time | to spend to learn more from | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I really love it, but i just don't have that much time for the course. I wish I have more time to spend to learn more from the course (personal time management issue). | learn more from the course (personal | Time | management issue). | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It covers a lot in a short time, definitely helped me gain some more knowledge. | covers a lot in a short | Time | definitely helped me gain some more | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The course is well designed and well presented. I wished for a bit more material on CSS and JavaScript. Perhaps, due to time constraints, there could be a separate course for looking at CSS and JavaScript at a more in-depth level. | CSS and JavaScript. Perhaps, due to | Time | constraints, there could be a separate | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Does not tell everything there is to know about HTML, CSS and JS but covers the basics and a bit beyond and does it well. I have been thought about DOM before but this is the first time I started to understand what it really is and what can be done with it. That was probably the best part. I recommend this course. | before but this is the first | Time | I started to understand what it | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The course is great for advanced beginners looking for a refresher in html/css and fully dives into JavaScript. If you are not familiar with JavaScript, I would suggest supplementing this course with another JS course or book because the course moves quickly through concepts most programmers have a hard time mastering. Still if you are a total noob, you should take the course anyway, as the projects emphasis use of form validation and object-oriented programming in JavaScript which is important for any new web developer. Due to the lack of support from the instructor and aides in terms of technical issues, grading, and discussion board input, I gave the course a 3 out of 5. My understanding is that Coursera is working with the instructor to take care of these issues though. | concepts most programmers have a hard | Time | mastering. Still if you are a | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | but its better if u can give us little more time (sometimes we are sick or traveling ) | u can give us little more | Time | (sometimes we are sick or traveling | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I think it's useless. Spending that amount of time explaining this basics it is not worth it. I'd rather go deeper in AngularJS, NodeJS or Ionic, after all this is a course for a mid level, so you should go to another course to take the basics and here a more advanced level. | it's useless. Spending that amount of | Time | explaining this basics it is not | Negative | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course has a very good level , very well structured , I enjoyed doing it and I learned a lot of things in a very short period of time .It is very intensive and very professionnal. | in a very short period of | Time | . It is very intensive and | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great introductory Course! The professor was easy to understand and took the time to explain in a clear and concise manner! Great job! | easy to understand and took the | Time | to explain in a clear and | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I enjoyed a lot the course and I think, even if it takes 3 weeks and looks short it isn't, it's very complete and teaches you the basis to grow up by yourself but at the same time to start creating :) | by yourself but at the same | Time | to start creating :) | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I have learned a lot in a short time. I would recommend. | learned a lot in a short | Time | I would recommend. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Originally, I rated this course 3-stars. However, I have since decided it is worth 1-star after taking the next course in the series, Bootstrap. I thought that there wasn't enough time to cover all the material to make this course good. After taking the next course, I see that it is possible to deliver a lot of material and concepts in short order. However, it takes thinking, planning, and dedication. I think this course is TERRIBLE and seriously needs an overhaul. After taking this course, you barely know any CSS and despite passing assignments that don't challenge, you're probably worse off than a student who fails in school. The course suffers from the extremely short timeframe. Covering one of each of the three core topics a week is just insufficient to provide any sort of depth to this course. While there are supplementary readings, Coursera and the participating institutions need to understand that there are those who are taking courses to get more than a one page Wiki style coverage of a topic. | I thought that there wasn't enough | Time | to cover all the material to | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course helped expand on my JavaScript knowledge, particularly concerning DOM structure. However, if I had been a beginner in any of these topics, I'm not sure if this course would have been enough. Not much time is spent on clarifying HTML and CSS, i.e., there were a lot of topics untouched. Additionally, while the instructor's videos were excellent, the professor did not participate in course discussions at all. I think there were many times when he should have been available to lend a helping/clarifying hand. | would have been enough. Not much | Time | is spent on clarifying HTML and | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course helped expand on my JavaScript knowledge, particularly concerning DOM structure. However, if I had been a beginner in any of these topics, I'm not sure if this course would have been enough. Not much time is spent on clarifying HTML and CSS, i.e., there were a lot of topics untouched. Additionally, while the instructor's videos were excellent, the professor did not participate in course discussions at all. I think there were many times when he should have been available to lend a helping/clarifying hand. | all. I think there were many | Time | when he should have been available | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great set of lessons, covers the specifics and important main things of each of the topics. But I must say that several time the evaluation is a little too hard given the content of the course (talking about quis and projects) and that also is a lot of ground to cover. | But I must say that several | Time | the evaluation is a little too | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Structured Course that gives beginner to intermediate level expertise. Short course, so there is not much time to give challenging assignments that would prepare you for a job or industry level skill in this topic. The student enrollment was limited (compared to my other courses on Coursera) and hence the discussion forum was not active. There is no TA or instructor participation in discussion forum; hence my advanced questions in forum (intended to learn beyond the course) went unanswered. You can learn this all on internet, but the instructor nicely covered 3 topics in 3 weeks, which is helpful. | course, so there is not much | Time | to give challenging assignments that would | Negative | 0.91 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The class has a lot of good information but I felt as though it was a bit disorganized. There were way too many people taking the class but not enough to grade the assignments. On the plus side I was able to switch to another session of the class while keeping all of my progress so hopefully my assignments will get graded this time around and I'll be able to complete the class. If an auto-grader or a way to ensure that everybody who turns in assignments will get those assignments graded back quickly could be implemented this would be a stellar class. Despite it's faults though I would still recommend it as I did learn a fair amount of HTML, CSS and JS quickly. I look forward to additional classes from this university. Thank you for your efforts. | my assignments will get graded this | Time | around and I'll be able to | Positive | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great explanation showing a lot of details, the assignments were very well explained and helped a lot in learning. If the videos were shorter in time it would be better. | If the videos were shorter in | Time | it would be better. | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Hi, I got promoted as a beta tester only 4 days ago, which was too short to review the whole course. So, here's my review for the first two weeks. The course is nice and easy to follow. It looks like beginner level. However, since it seems aimed at beginners, I think the teacher should put more emphasis on - good practices (i.e. when there are several ways to do something, always indicate which one is recommended). - accessibility for people with disabilities, which should be a priority when creating new website Also, I think that 3 weeks is a bit too short. The first week should at least be split in two so that students get more time to practice HTML/CSS coding. Lastly, there should be many more practice quizzes and (why not?) optional projects. Thank you for having me as a beta tester. | two so that students get more | Time | to practice HTML/CSS coding. Lastly, there | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | While the lectures were good, one of the mentors wasn't profesional at all, she was nasty, though the other one was very fine. But my chief complaint is the terrible method (in creative writing classes only ?) of using peer reviews to pass the class. I had a non-English-speaking person NOT pass me, a former English teacher, for no other reason than he misread the assignment. So I had to resubmit. I don't know who finally passed me, I think the peer review process is a shambles, and it lets Coursera personnel out of the process of doing grading and opens a can of worms with an incompetent peer reviewer having the power to not pass me. I don't think I will be taking creative writing classes again at Coursera, as going through that broken peer review process and having one mentor being off the wall just wasn't worth my time and anxiety. | the wall just wasn't worth my | Time | and anxiety. | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I found this course helpful especially because I'm in the process of revising my manuscript. I found the lessons on revision strategies were great reminders to take the time with my work, have patience with myself, maintain objectivity with my own work just as much as with that of others, and remain receptive to feedback at every stage of my poetry writing journey. | were great reminders to take the | Time | with my work, have patience with | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I really loved this course! I have always loved reading poetry and have tried my hand at it periodically over many years. I learned a lot , wrote some poems that I like, and most of all enjoyed the teacher so very much. He made it so much fun, that I found myself laughing out loud several times. The workshop idea was also good, and I learned from reading the others' poems. Thank you for this course. ! | found myself laughing out loud several | Time | The workshop idea was also good, | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Fantastic course. I'm not very good at actually completing MOOCs (something about not having to answer to anyone, I suspect!) but the reviewing of classmates' work was done nicely, enough pressure to mean the assignments actually got done, without requiring an unreasonable amount of time. Douglas is a fantastic teacher and really inspiring; the course has revitalised my writing in just the way I needed! | without requiring an unreasonable amount of | Time | Douglas is a fantastic teacher and | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | At first I thought this course was going to be rather simplistic but it was anything but that. I loved the exercises we had to do. I really got into them and it was the first time I felt inspired to try my hand at writing poetry. The teaching was great--he has a great future ahead of him in entertainment I would say! | them and it was the first | Time | I felt inspired to try my | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | wonderful teacher, its funny at the same time smart. | teacher, its funny at the same | Time | smart. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Designed more for a child learning about poetry for the first time. Some of the facts about poetry aren't accurate. The effort to make the class more engaging ironically only distracts from the course material. The time spent attempting humor could have been spent on teaching, but instead a lot of time is wasted by speaking down to the viewer like they are a toddler. I did not finish this class as I couldn't stand the videos. | learning about poetry for the first | Time | Some of the facts about poetry | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Designed more for a child learning about poetry for the first time. Some of the facts about poetry aren't accurate. The effort to make the class more engaging ironically only distracts from the course material. The time spent attempting humor could have been spent on teaching, but instead a lot of time is wasted by speaking down to the viewer like they are a toddler. I did not finish this class as I couldn't stand the videos. | distracts from the course material. The | Time | spent attempting humor could have been | Negative | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Designed more for a child learning about poetry for the first time. Some of the facts about poetry aren't accurate. The effort to make the class more engaging ironically only distracts from the course material. The time spent attempting humor could have been spent on teaching, but instead a lot of time is wasted by speaking down to the viewer like they are a toddler. I did not finish this class as I couldn't stand the videos. | teaching, but instead a lot of | Time | is wasted by speaking down to | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | The course material is very good. The most obvious issue with the course, is that peer revision takes a very long time, which means that you will get overdue assignments no matter what. For instance, after three weeks I'm still waiting for a revision that I wanted to use for the final workshop. I assume that instructor involvement in project revision is impossible in this kind of online course; but perhaps, if the issue is that people aren't getting their work reviewed, there could be an incentive for reviewers, for example, get an instructor/mentor review, if you submit at least, say, 10 thorough peer reviews. | peer revision takes a very long | Time | which means that you will get | Positive | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I loved it. I truly enjoyed my time through this course. Excellent teacher who knows his stuff. Thank-you for this writing and educational opportunity for me to jump-start my muse again. | loved it. I truly enjoyed my | Time | through this course. Excellent teacher who | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | In short presentations, Doug manages to give insightful tools to crafting a fine-tuned poem. He makes learning about rhyme, metaphor and scansion uncomplicated while he hones your focus, so your writing can surprise you. The class exercises and community feedback help create a classroom of learners. I was inspired. For the first time I understood iambic pentameter, trochees and scansion. The best tool was learning how to revise, how to look for the turn in the poem and expand that turn into something unforeseen. | I was inspired. For the first | Time | I understood iambic pentameter, trochees and | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | It gets 3 stars only because I learned new things in the class. But the teacher (Bless his heart for meaning well) ended up being rather annoying and distracting with his constant antics. It's okay to throw that in every now and then but this was really awful, makes you want to forward to the parts where he is normal. That's when you can pay attention to him and understand it all. Think you should ask him to tone it down big time... Everything in small doses is great. I think there is an unfair marking system in the last week - I wrote about it too. I don't want to pay for a course and have my points cut for silly reasons. If that's how it works, I never want to pay for certificates. What's the point in paying for 'subjectivity' or 'having to adapt my answers to suit the course'. | him to tone it down big | Time | . . Everything in small doses | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I am presently taking this course for fun, I love writing, specially creating poetry. I find the instructor very engaging, interesting, and motivating. He also seems to know his subject very well. He makes the time I spend in class worthwhile. He is just plain fun! Love this class. Julia Boulder, CO | subject very well. He makes the | Time | I spend in class worthwhile. He | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Very informative and at the same time entertaining. Thank you. | Very informative and at the same | Time | entertaining. Thank you. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | Great teacher and great content BUT I just wish that it would have been more abundant with information. it seemed for times maybe too short. | abundant with information. it seemed for | Time | maybe too short. | Negative | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| loAmvxJgEea8fxLSgUgxeQ | The instructors do know their subjects and Paul Rodriguez has a wonderfully clear, practiced, to the point delivery. However, the class was not designed well. It appears the instructors did not work together to create the course material or have a well-thought agenda. What we have are concepts introduced without sufficient or any explanation, coursework that involves tweaking software instead of understanding the data transformations, rambling lectures, and no sense of accomplishment. I mostly spent my time working through confusing assignments where the key was to find an example, copy it and tweak it. What was it producing? How was it working? Why were the results significant? Those questions were left unanswered. Learning how software works is important, but we learned neither how it works or why. Also, the course did not build upon the previous Big Data courses. I expected to learn how Machine Learning fits as a piece in the overall puzzle of Hadoop and Big Data. But this class felt thrown together. It's not worth the cost and it's a shame to UCSD. The Big Data series has been overall a disappointment. There are a few good instructors, but they can't save a series of courses that have been poorly thought through. | of accomplishment. I mostly spent my | Time | working through confusing assignments where the | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| LTwsxXPTEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | This course was very comprehensible and I learnt the complexity and excitement to tackle with climate change and economic development at the same time. Episodes from many countries are also introduced by kinds of stakeholders were interesting too. I recommend this course if you're interested in climate change issues. | and economic development at the same | Time | Episodes from many countries are also | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| LTwsxXPTEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | Super-awesome course that taught me about the super-wicked problem of our time and how to effectively achieve climate change mitigation and development objectives from developing countries context | about the super-wicked problem of our | Time | and how to effectively achieve climate | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | It was an excellent course. I learnt good strategies for organizing my time. I recommend it. | learnt good strategies for organizing my | Time | I recommend it. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | A must-take course for any teacher and any one who wants to improve their productivity or time management. Sign up right now! | wants to improve their productivity or | Time | management. Sign up right now! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This is something I needed for a long time. Thanks for helping me get organized. | something I needed for a long | Time | Thanks for helping me get organized. | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This course is brilliant, full of insights and easy to start routines that make your life as a teacher so much easier and most of all brings back the fun part of being a teacher! All the skills I picked up during this course are helping me in my day to day life as a teacher and have helped me cut out some "me time" in my fast-peaced life style Thank-you | me cut out some " me | Time | in my fast-peaced life style Thank-you | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This is a wonderful Course, if you are having issues about time management this will surely help. Totally recommended. | if you are having issues about | Time | management this will surely help. Totally | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | Great course, it helped me a lot on how to organize my time, I strongly recommend it | lot on how to organize my | Time | I strongly recommend it | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | I liked it! I think it can be finished in a much shorter time, though. | be finished in a much shorter | Time | though. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | Thank you for your effort and time! | Thank you for your effort and | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | It helped me alot to get organised and know I can do way more than I could do in my limited time. BTW some tasks were just impossible to achieve | I could do in my limited | Time | BTW some tasks were just impossible | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | After many years of trying different methods, this has been the first time a planning system is explained ot me in a way I can truly implement and benefit from it. I am ADHD and the concepts of time and linear thinking are VERY difficult for me. This course split the concepts into chunks i could actually manage and then put all the tools together in a process I love to follow. The videos are clear, well organized, the assignments are applicable immediately. Love it and recommend it to anybody looking for better time management, productivity, and balance. Whether a teacher or not | methods, this has been the first | Time | a planning system is explained ot | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | After many years of trying different methods, this has been the first time a planning system is explained ot me in a way I can truly implement and benefit from it. I am ADHD and the concepts of time and linear thinking are VERY difficult for me. This course split the concepts into chunks i could actually manage and then put all the tools together in a process I love to follow. The videos are clear, well organized, the assignments are applicable immediately. Love it and recommend it to anybody looking for better time management, productivity, and balance. Whether a teacher or not | am ADHD and the concepts of | Time | and linear thinking are VERY difficult | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | After many years of trying different methods, this has been the first time a planning system is explained ot me in a way I can truly implement and benefit from it. I am ADHD and the concepts of time and linear thinking are VERY difficult for me. This course split the concepts into chunks i could actually manage and then put all the tools together in a process I love to follow. The videos are clear, well organized, the assignments are applicable immediately. Love it and recommend it to anybody looking for better time management, productivity, and balance. Whether a teacher or not | it to anybody looking for better | Time | management, productivity, and balance. Whether a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | Great course. It has given me a few tools to be able to plan and be more efficient with my time! Thank you | and be more efficient with my | Time | Thank you | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This is really a time management class ~ an essential for anyone who wants to make the most out of their time! | This is really a | Time | management class ~ an essential for | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This is really a time management class ~ an essential for anyone who wants to make the most out of their time! | make the most out of their | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | It is really important the way we get motivated to be organised saving time for us and for the students. | get motivated to be organised saving | Time | for us and for the students. | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | I'm not a teacher, but found many aspects of this course very useful to better organize at work or in my free time. | at work or in my free | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | This course was well-explained, concise, not too time consuming. It really helped me to get my personal life and my professional life organized. | course was well-explained, concise, not too | Time | consuming. It really helped me to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | Thanks a lot for this course. It helped me to take a look at my career from other perspective. I feel much more relaxed if my time is perfectlly planned. Though I have to considerate unexpected events in my daily schedule still I keep on the top of my work. Jana | feel much more relaxed if my | Time | is perfectlly planned. Though I have | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | Wonderful course! Just took it for the second time before the new study year, just to refresh my knowledge about being organized (I took a break in my daily routine of organizing myself because of the vacation). Very inspiring. I had also recommended to a friend, so, I can also recommend it to everyone. Not only teachers! | Just took it for the second | Time | before the new study year, just | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lUcQU1MNEeSstCIAC1GOZw | I am not a teacher, I am a former librarian now housewife, and I found this class to be incredibly useful. It had me evaluate the way I use my time and why and come up with strategies to improve my organization. I highly recommend it to any busy individual, especially new teachers, librarians, or education administrators. | evaluate the way I use my | Time | and why and come up with | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| LwM5OhquEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good as a very simple overview. This is more high school level than college level... but if that is what you are looking for, then worth the small investment of time and effort it will take. | then worth the small investment of | Time | and effort it will take. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| LwM5OhquEeWjrA6seF25aw | The course is very helpful for those who have very limited time on their hand. I wish videos were longer since I prefer to listen more than to read. You need some background on the reproductive system in order to fully understand it. | for those who have very limited | Time | on their hand. I wish videos | Positive | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| lXNlz0B0EeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The presentation and content of lectures were compelling, motivating and disturbing. Very well done. No one really responded on the forums. This may have been because of small class size. In other classes I have taken on coursera the forums are quite active, and an instructor weighs in from time to time to answer questions or be present. Assignments were peer graded, so much was gained from reading other students interpretation of the material. I suggest putting the additional reading lists at the end of each unit, or in a separate side bar. They were hard to find in the syllabus. Overall an extremely worthwhile course. | and an instructor weighs in from | Time | to time to answer questions or | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| lXNlz0B0EeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The presentation and content of lectures were compelling, motivating and disturbing. Very well done. No one really responded on the forums. This may have been because of small class size. In other classes I have taken on coursera the forums are quite active, and an instructor weighs in from time to time to answer questions or be present. Assignments were peer graded, so much was gained from reading other students interpretation of the material. I suggest putting the additional reading lists at the end of each unit, or in a separate side bar. They were hard to find in the syllabus. Overall an extremely worthwhile course. | instructor weighs in from time to | Time | to answer questions or be present. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| lXNlz0B0EeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Foundations for Global Health Responders offers an introduction to global health issues tailored for those interested in global health missions. The course includes video presentations and discussions by numerous physicians associated with the University of Colorado School of Medicine as well as several other subject-matter experts. I found the presentations and supplemental materials helpful in gaining a basic understanding that I can expand upon in the future. Well worth your time if you are interested in participating in global health missions but are not sure what area you might like to focus on! | in the future. Well worth your | Time | if you are interested in participating | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | The course is clear and goes at a sustained but correct pace. I really like the fact to show the weakness to understand what are the requirements of a secure PRF, PRP & co! Optional programming assignments are really interesting unfortunately they take too much time to do and lack of guidance as it could be the case for the famous ML course. At least the first exercises should provide a development environment to get familiar with: hex, crypto libs, dictionary research, stats algorithms implementation ... The first two weeks lack of in-video tests. | interesting unfortunately they take too much | Time | to do and lack of guidance | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | The course was authentically cryptic. Just kidding. Once I listened to Prof. Boneh a few time over, I started to get the idea. asymptotic security while never stated as such played a fundamental role in the security proofs. Professor Boneh augmented the notion of correctness to include immunity from side channel (Power and timing attacks). The course was a great medley of pragmatic advice and theory. I am grateful for this class. | listened to Prof. Boneh a few | Time | over, I started to get the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | It 's the second time I follow this course and I still find that so amazing. I'm waiting Crypto II until a year and I hope it will be released soon... Thanks Pr Boneh for sharing your little (for you) big (for me) knowledge ! | It 's the second | Time | I follow this course and I | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | This time it will be finished. I have such a craze on cryptography and network security. i want to finish the course perfectly this time :) | This | Time | it will be finished. I have | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | This time it will be finished. I have such a craze on cryptography and network security. i want to finish the course perfectly this time :) | to finish the course perfectly this | Time | :) | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I didn't have time to finish but first couple of weeks were great, a lot of math concepts sometimes hard to grasp but I like it, that is why I enrolled, I recommend it for anybody who knows some math and want to know history, how it works and background of cryptography from beginning till this day. | I didn't have | Time | to finish but first couple of | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| lYw3nxuGEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I have already finished this course in 2014. This is my second time. Five-star recommendation! | in 2014. This is my second | Time | Five-star recommendation! | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| m0Du-7_DEeWn-wqIckNy5Q | Well defined courses for student. A student or any age of person can understand easily in couples of times. Good work by Coursera. Best thing is that they give financial aid for poor students and i am one who get aid. Very thanks you for this. | can understand easily in couples of | Time | Good work by Coursera. Best thing | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| M0etLDe9EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Well explained content, though at times the presentation felt a little slow. Solid coding assignments that do a good job of reenforcing the course materials. A couple small topics weren't explained clearly but overall it's been a very informative class. Thanks for the knowledge! | Well explained content, though at | Time | the presentation felt a little slow. | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| M0etLDe9EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Thorough, excellent coverage of the the subject. Well worth your time. | the the subject. Well worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Instructor speaks too slow and sometimes hardly audible with my earphones plugged in with 100% sound. Incredibly slow paced. Coffee must!!! Too much of story and history and introduction. Much less material presented for concepts shown. Much of the lecture time is wasted on things which does not matter, for example Djikstra shortest path... I would be more interested to know about the algorithm than a huge lecture on who is Djikstra, and also would like to have some exercise to implement the same and realise. Very unsatisfied with the course. But there is no other courses offered for C++ programming language in English Language. Not worth the time. | concepts shown. Much of the lecture | Time | is wasted on things which does | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Instructor speaks too slow and sometimes hardly audible with my earphones plugged in with 100% sound. Incredibly slow paced. Coffee must!!! Too much of story and history and introduction. Much less material presented for concepts shown. Much of the lecture time is wasted on things which does not matter, for example Djikstra shortest path... I would be more interested to know about the algorithm than a huge lecture on who is Djikstra, and also would like to have some exercise to implement the same and realise. Very unsatisfied with the course. But there is no other courses offered for C++ programming language in English Language. Not worth the time. | in English Language. Not worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.77 | 1.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This was very good course to learn about the differences between C and C++. I have been C programmer for some time and never had a C++ introduction until this course. | have been C programmer for some | Time | and never had a C++ introduction | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The course content is good. But it needs some polishing... Major comment: The assignment submission/review process should be improved. Grading system is not clearly defined at the time of submission. Some grading question are inherently subjective "Is the code at least somewhat efficient?". But even for inherently objective questions "Is the code correct?" (as does it give the correct answer" the staff does not provide the correct answer... I think the staff should create some automated review for what is objective: does the code compile? does it yield the correct answer? is it efficient enough? (Just like many other courses on Coursera) And only when it passes the automatic review, use peer grading for coding style. Finally there a lot of confusion with the deadlines. Minor comments: Lucky Coursera has an option to play twice faster! Not that the content is too easy, but the talking ... pace ... is ... hum... very ... ... slow. Also how come for a programming course the slides with code are so poorly formated??? | is not clearly defined at the | Time | of submission. Some grading question are | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The course was very useful for me. I have known new features of C++11 and now I use them in my projects, so my programming style become both more modern, and more effective. It was very lucky for me to have at the same time other course about graph theory, so I again learned and implemented those algorythms. I suppose for new students before this course would be better to have some experience in C++ programming and some understanding of OOD and OOP, so you can think about interesting ideas instead of trying to read a 1000-paged book in a week to learn base of coding. Now I am watitng for part B. | me to have at the same | Time | other course about graph theory, so | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | - Assumptions about the student are not clear, before starting the course. Instructor examples are not practical in all contexts. Jump to dijkstra in very second week, without clarity on major C++ concepts and examples, is too much an expectation from the student switching from C to C++ for the first time. Confusion with deadline for assignments. too many lectures during later week courses, as if the effort is to crunch everything in that week and complete the course. If its spaced properly with examples and problems over few more weeks, it would help. | C to C++ for the first | Time | Confusion with deadline for assignments. too | Positive | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| M9dntkEoEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The instructor speaks too slow. Teaching concepts that are not valid anymore. e.g. prefer inline over function call, const vs #define, declaring variable anywhere in the code etc... The topics are too small and too much time is devoted to them. | are too small and too much | Time | is devoted to them. | Negative | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| maX993EhEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Unfortunately, didn`t enjoy this course at all. I have gone through 7 courses on Coursera and finished them with the biggest pleasure and great results. This time I had to leave the course before finishing because: 1st: content is organized awfully (for example "HTML overview" - I knew all the material so I have an idea how it should look like, but lecturer started from the middle of all concepts, than moved to the beginning and together it looked like an unlinked content. I have simply lost a logic inside this. 2nd: Very difficult to get an idea: lecturer doesn`t try to simplify the content, even opposite - I had a feeling, that he makes easy things complicated for a reason. My husbend is a programmer with 10 years experience and when he watched the lecture he said, that even for him it was difficult to understand all the thing (things he actually knows). All these terms used, no relevant examples, too complex words and so on - I lost concentration, I had to google a lot of unknown terms, I had to stop lecture every 30 seconds to reread or repeat the peace of lecture, because I could not understand it. As I mentioned, I know HTML well, but it was described so complex, that it was difficult to link my actual knowledge to lecturer words. 3rd: not international student friendly. Use of complex words in places where they were not necessary, complex structures, too fast language... I am pretty good in English, but had to stop video and to google translate some "smart" words lecturer used without particular need - I don`t mean definitions, just some epithets to make his speech "smarter". I completed Coursera specialization by Michigan University and it was completely easy with plain text, short sentences, so well made for international student. 4th: this is boring. I am sorry, but this is true. I am interested in all these questions, but for some reasons I lose my attention every time. Maybe the reason is in all points I have just mentioned, but I didn`t enjoy this course at all and it was the first time I didn`t enjoy something connected with web app development. Please, don`t be mad at me - lecturer is a very charming and charismatic person, but I simply don`t like how the material is presented. 5th: I have a feeling like all slides are taken from some scientific books and lecturer reads comments from some science articles, it is not like described with own words, simplified for better comprehension, cleared with own real-life examples and in atmosphere of friendly conversation with some emotions and humor. Please, take my feedback just as my personal opinion and hope other students will enjoy it more. | biggest pleasure and great results. This | Time | I had to leave the course | Positive | 0.85 | 2.0 |
| maX993EhEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Unfortunately, didn`t enjoy this course at all. I have gone through 7 courses on Coursera and finished them with the biggest pleasure and great results. This time I had to leave the course before finishing because: 1st: content is organized awfully (for example "HTML overview" - I knew all the material so I have an idea how it should look like, but lecturer started from the middle of all concepts, than moved to the beginning and together it looked like an unlinked content. I have simply lost a logic inside this. 2nd: Very difficult to get an idea: lecturer doesn`t try to simplify the content, even opposite - I had a feeling, that he makes easy things complicated for a reason. My husbend is a programmer with 10 years experience and when he watched the lecture he said, that even for him it was difficult to understand all the thing (things he actually knows). All these terms used, no relevant examples, too complex words and so on - I lost concentration, I had to google a lot of unknown terms, I had to stop lecture every 30 seconds to reread or repeat the peace of lecture, because I could not understand it. As I mentioned, I know HTML well, but it was described so complex, that it was difficult to link my actual knowledge to lecturer words. 3rd: not international student friendly. Use of complex words in places where they were not necessary, complex structures, too fast language... I am pretty good in English, but had to stop video and to google translate some "smart" words lecturer used without particular need - I don`t mean definitions, just some epithets to make his speech "smarter". I completed Coursera specialization by Michigan University and it was completely easy with plain text, short sentences, so well made for international student. 4th: this is boring. I am sorry, but this is true. I am interested in all these questions, but for some reasons I lose my attention every time. Maybe the reason is in all points I have just mentioned, but I didn`t enjoy this course at all and it was the first time I didn`t enjoy something connected with web app development. Please, don`t be mad at me - lecturer is a very charming and charismatic person, but I simply don`t like how the material is presented. 5th: I have a feeling like all slides are taken from some scientific books and lecturer reads comments from some science articles, it is not like described with own words, simplified for better comprehension, cleared with own real-life examples and in atmosphere of friendly conversation with some emotions and humor. Please, take my feedback just as my personal opinion and hope other students will enjoy it more. | reasons I lose my attention every | Time | Maybe the reason is in all | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| maX993EhEeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Unfortunately, didn`t enjoy this course at all. I have gone through 7 courses on Coursera and finished them with the biggest pleasure and great results. This time I had to leave the course before finishing because: 1st: content is organized awfully (for example "HTML overview" - I knew all the material so I have an idea how it should look like, but lecturer started from the middle of all concepts, than moved to the beginning and together it looked like an unlinked content. I have simply lost a logic inside this. 2nd: Very difficult to get an idea: lecturer doesn`t try to simplify the content, even opposite - I had a feeling, that he makes easy things complicated for a reason. My husbend is a programmer with 10 years experience and when he watched the lecture he said, that even for him it was difficult to understand all the thing (things he actually knows). All these terms used, no relevant examples, too complex words and so on - I lost concentration, I had to google a lot of unknown terms, I had to stop lecture every 30 seconds to reread or repeat the peace of lecture, because I could not understand it. As I mentioned, I know HTML well, but it was described so complex, that it was difficult to link my actual knowledge to lecturer words. 3rd: not international student friendly. Use of complex words in places where they were not necessary, complex structures, too fast language... I am pretty good in English, but had to stop video and to google translate some "smart" words lecturer used without particular need - I don`t mean definitions, just some epithets to make his speech "smarter". I completed Coursera specialization by Michigan University and it was completely easy with plain text, short sentences, so well made for international student. 4th: this is boring. I am sorry, but this is true. I am interested in all these questions, but for some reasons I lose my attention every time. Maybe the reason is in all points I have just mentioned, but I didn`t enjoy this course at all and it was the first time I didn`t enjoy something connected with web app development. Please, don`t be mad at me - lecturer is a very charming and charismatic person, but I simply don`t like how the material is presented. 5th: I have a feeling like all slides are taken from some scientific books and lecturer reads comments from some science articles, it is not like described with own words, simplified for better comprehension, cleared with own real-life examples and in atmosphere of friendly conversation with some emotions and humor. Please, take my feedback just as my personal opinion and hope other students will enjoy it more. | all and it was the first | Time | I didn`t enjoy something connected with | Positive | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Mostly common sense, but it is a good reinforcement. I like listening to the stories/examples but they could have been shorter and the course would have felt like a more efficient use of time. | like a more efficient use of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Too base for experienced people, not enough fundamental for beginners. After 2 weeks didn't find any useful information, it also very boring, so recommend to see video on 1.25 -1.5 speed. The course need to be significantly changed: 1. Who are the target audience 2. How many resources do we have (time etc) 3. What we would see as a result of course (knowledge, skills (hard, soft) etc. | How many resources do we have | Time | etc) 3. What we would see | Negative | 0.74 | 1.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | This course is easy to follow and the time required to complete the lectures and tests is very minimal. Great Course so far (Week Three). | is easy to follow and the | Time | required to complete the lectures and | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Presenter seemed a little unsure of what he was presenting by times | of what he was presenting by | Time | | Positive | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | The course s outstanding; well designed and well presented but it should be with statement of accomplishments. Because in third world countries, the concept of online open courses will take time to gain acceptance. So in order to prove the "Worth" of these course, they demand documentary proof. 49$ is big amount ( 1$ =104 PKR) in 3rd world countries, so its not possible to pay for one course. | of online open courses will take | Time | to gain acceptance. So in order | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Doesn't go much further then common sense. Introduces terms for concepts you probably know, just didn't know it's a concept. The lecturer is terrible. His stories, or i guess metaphors that are supposed to help you understand and remember things are aweful. He takes way too long to get the point across. Some helpful things are mentioned. Gives you the ability to distiguish problem solving methods, so you may use them as required. Nonetheless, mostly wasted my time watching this. | as required. Nonetheless, mostly wasted my | Time | watching this. | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Easy to learn ^^ The professor explain by giving easy understanding examples. Not take time too much | giving easy understanding examples. Not take | Time | too much | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Nice course, but a little "light" at times. What's great though is that there are no deadlines, which really enabled learning at my own pace whenever I had free time :) | but a little " light" at | Time | What's great though is that there | Positive | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| MdNTKtdhEeSgyyIAC4cL9g | Nice course, but a little "light" at times. What's great though is that there are no deadlines, which really enabled learning at my own pace whenever I had free time :) | own pace whenever I had free | Time | :) | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| MEgKOpw3EeWILQ7D3uPEMw | Some useful frameworks but would have preferred to see more time spent addressing models and frameworks for testing the potential success of new ideas and comparing between different ideas. The tournament model covered here was not sufficient to really address this issue and it requires more depth. But otherwise a decent introduction to those not familiar/ experienced with business/ start ups. | would have preferred to see more | Time | spent addressing models and frameworks for | Positive | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| MEgKOpw3EeWILQ7D3uPEMw | It is a great course for anyone t o learn the basics of things to consider before launching a successful business enterprise. Kudos to all U Penn professors who have dedicated a lot of time to create this master piece of an online course. | who have dedicated a lot of | Time | to create this master piece of | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| meQ0ic9uEeWu4RLrx6VBYw | Waiting for long time for such excellent course | Waiting for long | Time | for such excellent course | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| mG15ZhQ9EeWCWhKuhISYpw | For someone without a couple of years of college or a technical school this could be way over your head. To much to learn in a short period of time. By eliminating all the basic engineering math tutorials and very simple circuit analysis the course would be more focused. It should be a prerequisite to have finished a pre-calculus course to allow for more in-depth presentation of the engineering material, especially the acoustics. However, it does cover a lot of the basics for understanding music engineering. I look forward to part two. | learn in a short period of | Time | By eliminating all the basic engineering | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| mG15ZhQ9EeWCWhKuhISYpw | I never thought I'd learn so much in such a short period of time, thank you! | in such a short period of | Time | thank you! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Good course, gently showing an introduction. Had the playspeed at 1.25x the entire time though, otherwise they talked too slow. | playspeed at 1. 25x the entire | Time | though, otherwise they talked too slow. | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Second time to take this class. Awesome! | Second | Time | to take this class. Awesome! | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Really enjoyable course - this was my second time of taking it as I wanted to revise the topic. This time around I didn't have the time to engage in the forums as much, and found that I missed the lively discussions there. | course - this was my second | Time | of taking it as I wanted | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Really enjoyable course - this was my second time of taking it as I wanted to revise the topic. This time around I didn't have the time to engage in the forums as much, and found that I missed the lively discussions there. | wanted to revise the topic. This | Time | around I didn't have the time | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Really enjoyable course - this was my second time of taking it as I wanted to revise the topic. This time around I didn't have the time to engage in the forums as much, and found that I missed the lively discussions there. | time around I didn't have the | Time | to engage in the forums as | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I REALLY love this course. I love learning new things all the time, and this course really helps with that. It puts new perspectives in your mind and allows you to think further into things you may or may not have already known. Very interesting course, always mind grabbing. | love learning new things all the | Time | and this course really helps with | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Very interesting and engaging course. There are longer and more in-depth courses if you want them but if you want a concise overview of astrobiology on your own time, then this course is perfect! | overview of astrobiology on your own | Time | then this course is perfect! | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Wonderful course. I took it just to satisfy my curiosity. I really enjoyed listening to the lectures and doing the quizzes. Many thanks to the professor for taking the time to make it. I would be happy to see a more advanced version. | to the professor for taking the | Time | to make it. I would be | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I really enjoyed learning about astrobiology. We certainly live in interesting times, and this course does an excellent job introducing the students to the current topics and technologies. | astrobiology. We certainly live in interesting | Time | and this course does an excellent | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I would like to send my thanks to the professor for sharing the course and all the assistants for the efforts you have done. The classes are very interesting and I enjoyed my time while following the classes as well as doing the quiz. | very interesting and I enjoyed my | Time | while following the classes as well | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Almost perfect (for the intro level it was designed for). I would suggest that next time, if possible, instructor image could be a little smaller and the actual images illustrating the points he is talking about a little bigger and more diverse. But that is a minor, please, don't get me wrong. The course was very very good, thank you a lot. Also, the off-line written forum-style discussions were very very good. | for). I would suggest that next | Time | if possible, instructor image could be | Negative | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Amazing! Thank you professor. Easily one of the best professors I've come across. The course was not too complicated, at the same time it was extremely understandable. May there be many more courses like this on the subject (as it develops and spreads worldwide). Cheers! Highly recommended. Thanks again! Thank you Coursera! | not too complicated, at the same | Time | it was extremely understandable. May there | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Initially, I thought the 9-week course was boring. I actually did not start it on time and was busy to start viewing the videos. However when I started on them, I actually found myself very much engaged to the topics being discussed. I ended up finishing the lectures earlier than scheduled. | actually did not start it on | Time | and was busy to start viewing | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | The lectures can be a bit dry, but this is a wonderfully fascinating subject, and well worth the time to explore if you're at all interested in human behavior! | fascinating subject, and well worth the | Time | to explore if you're at all | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | This is a topic which I have been waiting to learn for a long time. Thanks Coursera and Vasily | waiting to learn for a long | Time | Thanks Coursera and Vasily | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Great speaker. Knowledgable and has a good way of presenting his information. I suggest that he adds objectives to every week's material as it can be confusing at times what we are exactly expected to learn. | as it can be confusing at | Time | what we are exactly expected to | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Its an amazing course. I am a PhD student in Neurosciences and this is an exciting field for the future. I like the way Dr. Vasily Klucharev puts completed things in a slow and efficient way. That way one doesn't get overburdened with lots of information in a short time. Also, he revisits previously taught concepts to facilitate learning of new concepts which is an amazing thing to do. | lots of information in a short | Time | Also, he revisits previously taught concepts | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| mGM6AmlPEeSdNiIACrbZkA | Very interesting course and very competent professor with high teaching abilities. The only shortage were the subtitles that, most of the times, were completely wrong and confusing. They didn’t match the professor’s speech | the subtitles that, most of the | Time | were completely wrong and confusing. They | Negative | 0.88 | 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 | At the first | Time | it was a very usefull course | Positive | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | i was very excited at the beginning of the course but when i figure out that i must paid for unlock some important lecture i really felt disappointed i thought i should only paid if i want to took the Certificate i had been wasted some time at this course now i have to search for another course but complete one this time. | Certificate i had been wasted some | Time | at this course now i have | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | i was very excited at the beginning of the course but when i figure out that i must paid for unlock some important lecture i really felt disappointed i thought i should only paid if i want to took the Certificate i had been wasted some time at this course now i have to search for another course but complete one this time. | another course but complete one this | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Brian tries to achieve too much in too little time. It addresses important issues and it gives a good overview, including some hidden gems (Machine Learning vs Stats, for example), but it feels mostly too rushed and superficial for my taste/expectations, and it fails to connect to my previous knowledge (and I have a PhD in Maths, although no strong Stats background), hence little added value for me when I cannot relate to what is being discussed. | achieve too much in too little | Time | It addresses important issues and it | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Great information. For real newbies like me, might help to review basic concepts a few times (e.g. what does "p" mean? I know it was explained, but didn't grasp it the first time, helps if I hear it a few times, etc.) But, hey, you guys have done a fantastic job pulling all this together and teaching it at the 30,000 ft. view level. So great job. | to review basic concepts a few | Time | (e. g. what does " p" | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Great information. For real newbies like me, might help to review basic concepts a few times (e.g. what does "p" mean? I know it was explained, but didn't grasp it the first time, helps if I hear it a few times, etc.) But, hey, you guys have done a fantastic job pulling all this together and teaching it at the 30,000 ft. view level. So great job. | but didn't grasp it the first | Time | helps if I hear it a | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Great information. For real newbies like me, might help to review basic concepts a few times (e.g. what does "p" mean? I know it was explained, but didn't grasp it the first time, helps if I hear it a few times, etc.) But, hey, you guys have done a fantastic job pulling all this together and teaching it at the 30,000 ft. view level. So great job. | if I hear it a few | Time | etc. ) But, hey, you guys | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The course tests are at times partially unrelated to the content of the lessons. In the test of Lesson 7 we are asked if removing jargon from an analysis makes the analysis clearer. This is never mentioned in the course. The question does not have a unique yes/no solution. It depends on the context, in particular on the audience of the analysis and report. If I'm talking to technical people who knows a lot about the topic jargon can be useful, on the other hand if jargon is not documented it can be confusing. How are we supposed to know this? This is just one example, but all the courses of the EDS specialisation had these issues. I don't know if it is a language barrier or what but I feel that I didn't have a chance to study more to get a better score. You either happen to have the same idea of the teacher or you don't, and this is not professional. | The course tests are at | Time | partially unrelated to the content of | Positive | 0.74 | 1.0 |
| MMnLaEEjEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | Brian, Jeff, and Roger: Thank you very much for all the data science courses, really great. I generally rate them 5 stars. But for this one, I'm giving 3 stars, not because the content is not good (it is; it provides good practical and experiential information), but rather because the material seems repetitive at times either within the same course or with topics in the other courses. Also, the sequencing and lectures seem sometime a bit disjointed. May I humbly suggest an idea: Integrate the key points of this course relating to real-world examples and the sharing of real-world experiences into one of the other courses. Thank you. Robert Al-Jaar, PhD robert.aljaar@rassociates.biz | because the material seems repetitive at | Time | either within the same course or | Negative | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| mqcQFm6vEeWJ-wrnmCvZZw | An excellent wake up call any time in your career. | An excellent wake up call any | Time | in your career. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | It's not my first time to take a beginners course in Chinese so I already know some of the words and phrases, but this course was a good refresher course, too. The lessons were short and easy to remember. I think the expressions taught were also very practical. I hope there is a second part so I can continue my lessons in Chinese. Xie xie! | It's not my first | Time | to take a beginners course in | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Very nice course! It was very interesting for me to learn Mandarin as I was totally new to this language. We went through 7 weeks of lectures which don't take much time. Literally 10 min per day is enough. Now i know a lot but unfortunately still can't really talk. I'm looking forward for another course, because these 7 weeks were not enough for me) | of lectures which don't take much | Time | Literally 10 min per day is | Negative | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Excellent beginners course in Mandarin. The teacher introduces new words using pinyin in each 3-4 minute lesson and the content is reviewed in a quiz. The content is limited to reading and pronouncing pinyin words, which is perfectly acceptable to me since I'm supplementing this course with other in person classes. I love the 4 minute classes 4 times per week, since I never felt like I'm so far behind the deadlines that I can't catch up. | love the 4 minute classes 4 | Time | per week, since I never felt | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Lesson is easy to understand. Need to make more time to yourself for practice. | to understand. Need to make more | Time | to yourself for practice. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | it was an amazing class. perfect class to take for who works full time. few additional notions every week. the teacher patiently repeats several time ervy sentence to help with pronunciation. Thanks | to take for who works full | Time | few additional notions every week. the | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | it was an amazing class. perfect class to take for who works full time. few additional notions every week. the teacher patiently repeats several time ervy sentence to help with pronunciation. Thanks | week. the teacher patiently repeats several | Time | ervy sentence to help with pronunciation. | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | It 's perfect for those who try to speak for the first time! | try to speak for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Terrible. Had to verify multiple times. Audio quiz had no sound (struck-thru speaker icon I couldn't fix.) I'd be disappointed with Cousera for foisting this trash if I hadn't taken "Learning How to Learn," much less buggy. Would disenroll if there was any way to do so. | Terrible. Had to verify multiple | Time | Audio quiz had no sound (struck-thru | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Great Lessons with the student in mind! Easily absorbed part by part lessons give the new learners ample time to truly immerse himself in each lesson. | lessons give the new learners ample | Time | to truly immerse himself in each | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | The instructor goes over a lot of material that would be necessary to hold a basic conversation. I really like that she puts emphasis on pronouns and connector words and explains what each individual word's meaning is, instead of having you memorize random sentences without truly letting you know what the literal translation is. I've used Google Translate, Culture Alley and a couple of other sites which have all helped me learn the language but I can honestly say that this course has made the biggest impact for the small amount of time that I've been taking it. | impact for the small amount of | Time | that I've been taking it. | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Very interesting to learn the basis of Chinese ; very simple and clear! It is also a good basis to prepare the HSK but in my opinion it would have been interesting to have also the chinese characters writen in order to learn both at the same time! | to learn both at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Everything is very well! Ilike the material and the professor who is teaching us. She is very good. Thank you very much. But the only problem for me is that the wrong pronunciation is given by the professor. For me it wasa psycological issue. Because, I would remember the variant how you should not do! AndI think it is better to make an example only the right variant and repeting this several times as a tongue twister. During the course I am trying to avoid this wrong examples, trying to scroll later and not to hear them. Everything else I like very much! | right variant and repeting this several | Time | as a tongue twister. During the | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | by the way, it was a good start for me to learn the first time chinese. Thank you! | for me to learn the first | Time | chinese. Thank you! | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Thanks for this course which I'm not only learning Chinese but English as well at the same time. The pace of learning is just right to me. Thanks a lot. | English as well at the same | Time | The pace of learning is just | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Videos proceed way too fast for complete beginners and things are explained without enough underlying basics. Plus there is not really enough chance for repetitions in the videos. Tonal explanations are good, except for the green line where you are not told how to choose what part of that tone to pronounce every time. Overall, it could be a great course but falls short because the videos proceed way too fast and without enough repetitions or even practice exercises to be able to remember the phrases afterwards. | of that tone to pronounce every | Time | Overall, it could be a great | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | It is quite good course for beginners those are Latin-Language-speaking people. You don't need to learn a chinese characters. So, it is very simple. But, I think that these lectures lacks logiccal explanation. Even in beginning, the logical sturucte is undoubtedly important for further learning. And, Quiz are really easy. So, you can finish this course even in a day if you have a sufficient time. I do not think that this course will make someone really spaek Chinee in China. But, this should be recommended for only those are interested in Chinese and do not have a plan to go to china. | day if you have a sufficient | Time | I do not think that this | Negative | 0.74 | 3.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | A wonderfull introduction for beginners in Chinese. This was my first Chinese lesson ever, and i really enjoyed it : easy to understand. The teacher speaks very slowly and repeats each word/sentence 2 times, so we have time to train our ears to the "chinese speaking music". :-) This course focuses on oral chinese only (speaking and understanding), but you can go further and use other online ressources to learn reading/writing chinese too. | slowly and repeats each word/sentence 2 | Time | so we have time to train | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | A wonderfull introduction for beginners in Chinese. This was my first Chinese lesson ever, and i really enjoyed it : easy to understand. The teacher speaks very slowly and repeats each word/sentence 2 times, so we have time to train our ears to the "chinese speaking music". :-) This course focuses on oral chinese only (speaking and understanding), but you can go further and use other online ressources to learn reading/writing chinese too. | word/sentence 2 times, so we have | Time | to train our ears to the | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | The whole course is basically a short topic based phrasebook being read-out and over-explained in English. Since I already speak English, this isn't very useful. The course contains no dialogues, or any real situations where vocab's being reviewed. I found the exercise nitpicky and confusing, and there's no indication nor review of what actually you did wrong. Better just use an audio-phrasebook and repeat it using the same time. | and repeat it using the same | Time | | Positive | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I found this lesson so valuable! I love how the video teach me and I've gained some new words in Chinese as well as using phrase. I hope there are more Chinese lessons as well as other languages! Thanks for having it online so that we can study when we have free time! | can study when we have free | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This is very useful course! The professor describe all courses with clam and very kindly. I also love that it is an open course with no time limit so that I could enjoy and repeat every time I need. Please continue the next chapters or next Chinese language course for all of us. Thank you. | is an open course with no | Time | limit so that I could enjoy | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This is very useful course! The professor describe all courses with clam and very kindly. I also love that it is an open course with no time limit so that I could enjoy and repeat every time I need. Please continue the next chapters or next Chinese language course for all of us. Thank you. | I could enjoy and repeat every | Time | I need. Please continue the next | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This course is highly recommended for those who learn Chinese for the first time. | who learn Chinese for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | "Chinese for Beginners" is the best online resource I have found for learning a language. Professor Xiaoyu Liu's presentations are clear and easy to follow. Lectures build on content presented previously. The quizzes provide immediate feedback. The features that I found particularly helpful was the ability to pause after hearing a word, phrase, or sentence the professor said so I could repeat it several times before resuming the lecture. I also appreciated being able to repeat the quizzes as one way of reviewing the material. I hope that Peking University offers another online course for those who have completed "Chinese for Beginners." | so I could repeat it several | Time | before resuming the lecture. I also | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| mwj3ASWcEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | It worth spend your time to study and repeat again and again. It is not only taught you how to be a professional but also told you how to be a man. | It worth spend your | Time | to study and repeat again and | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Fantastic course. Perfect balance of practice and theory. I have tried learning regression a number of times now and after doing this course I feel like I finally have a good grasp on it. Absolutely no complaints. | tried learning regression a number of | Time | now and after doing this course | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | There are two frustrations with this iteration of the series. One: the quiz questions are often opaquely worded. Instead of being tested on the material just learned, it seemed like the objective was to learn to decode test questions. 2 and the most glaring omission, was that when students are asked to provide functions, only some are provided with a follow up test to ensure the function is working properly. If the output is syntactically correct but provides incorrect output then you're moving forward blindly after that. Then add the quiz questions from problem One above, and you're just wasting your time after that and building up frustration. Validating your code as you move along seems like a pretty rudimentary process to impart to students and when the teachers don't practice it themselves, there are bound to be problems. I like the intent of the course, and considering my outsider background to computer science, the mathematics etc, I did learn a fair bit. Not enough to justify the increasing frustration I was feeling toward the end of this course. I have no intention of taking any more at this point, not from these authors. | above, and you're just wasting your | Time | after that and building up frustration. | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | A great continuation to the previous course. This time the sole focus is on Regression, the instructor provides a very gradual approach to the concept. Through the assignments and the various case studies I finished the course with great knowledge of Regression and feel more comfortable now tackling regression problems | continuation to the previous course. This | Time | the sole focus is on Regression, | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I'll definitely keep learning the next course. Some people criticized about graphlab (I thought they should offer 2 versions like RStudio instead a limit-free one. Although I feel comfortable when using graphlab, I'll still use scikit-learn after finishing all courses because it is free and I just use for personally.) but you can use scikit-learn to pass this course (although you have to spend more time) , so this is not a sufficient reason to not giving 5 stars for me. Great course. | (although you have to spend more | Time | , so this is not a | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Well, i took a long time to complete this, because of my academics, projects and intern. Still i recently got accelerated and completed the project with 100% grades. It has been an awesome experience to learn so much concepts under a single course. Thanks a lot to the instructors Carlos and Emily for putting up this marvelous course. :) | Well, i took a long | Time | to complete this, because of my | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I learned quite a lot during this which I can use in practice. Everything is well explained in the video's. If I had to call a down side then I would say that I had a hard time with the math. This is because I never did something matrices and linear algebra. For those people who miss this background info I would like to say: if you're dedicated then you should be able to survive this course! | say that I had a hard | Time | with the math. This is because | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I do not this regression :D Honestly, I can not thank Carlos and Emily enough given such a solid and casual understanding. I am looking forward to every new Session and ofcourse the Capstone. But still a long way there, which is good news, more time with Carlos and Emily... yeah! | there, which is good news, more | Time | with Carlos and Emily. . . | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Really good course. Provides basic theoretical and hands on knowledge in the regression. Step by step programming quiz some times not demonstrate enough best practices or conceptual ideas. For example I would expect that if at step 1 we asked to assess performance based on single feature then at step 2 based on several features and compare results. But in most of the cases such comparison not proposed and results not explained. In addition it is not always clear why prediction accuracy better or worse. | Step by step programming quiz some | Time | not demonstrate enough best practices or | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I already knew how to do linear regression before taking this course; however, I had always struggled to understand how ridge and lasso regression worked and what their usefulness was; thanks to this course I was finally able to understand those concepts very well. The visual explanation of how the ridge and lasso regression work made this course well worth its time. | made this course well worth its | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | this was a really boring course not for the contet bu the teacher i fell bored every video because the theacher was really slow in everything tha she was showing, it is realy dificult to get focussed in the real topics when the teacher spend a lot of time explaining things at the end wont be evaluated. As an example I am not english native speaker but a had to put the playback speed to 1.50x in order to not get bored in all videos, it was really dificult to follow the teacher at the normal velocity , i just got sleep every video. and as a record i really like this topic so it is the tacher, I took the first course and it was a good experience but this one is owfull | the teacher spend a lot of | Time | explaining things at the end wont | Negative | 0.68 | 1.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I've spent a bit of time going through the Specialisation (paid for one course here) and other courses online that offer Machine Learning with Python. I looked at books too. I've come to the conclusion that it's unforgivable to teach it using graphlab (that you have to pay for after free licence expiry) when everyone else teaches scikit learn (sklearn) for good reason.The tools used on this course are also not very good. Everyone else teaches using text editors - for a good reason, you learn how to code properly. The lessons are also dry and there are far too many of them. | I've spent a bit of | Time | going through the Specialisation (paid for | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very challenging course. Could have been 5 had the course duration been stretched by 2 weeks. Tough to complete and do justice to the subject matter in the time frame provided. | to the subject matter in the | Time | frame provided. | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent, step-by-step introduction to regression. The instructor takes her time to make sure every step is explained with details. | to regression. The instructor takes her | Time | to make sure every step is | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very practicum course, probably one of the best MOOCs course for Regression. I am from CS background and honestly speaking, I have passed hard time to catch all the concept. Nonetheless, great instructor and 5 stars for her! I believe she left no stone upturned to make the course understand for us. Thank all. | honestly speaking, I have passed hard | Time | to catch all the concept. Nonetheless, | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | A very good starting to the journey to Machine Learning. Just one disappointment, I was expecting the classification and clustering courses to start together but the specialization has been delayed by a long time now. | has been delayed by a long | Time | now. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good introduction to linear regression. The quizzes are moderately difficult, and can be somewhat time consuming. There is a lot of depth to this topic, and tho this course touches on a lot of it, it won't be enough to get a very thorough understanding. In general I'm really glad I took this course | moderately difficult, and can be somewhat | Time | consuming. There is a lot of | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent course on the use of regression in machine learning. It does not simply stop with simple linear regression but also tackles ridge and lasso regression using Python notebooks. One big advantage for those not familiar with Python is that the Python notebooks have just enough boiler plate code to make it feasible for Python beginners but not so much that the challenge is gone. The lectures can feel rather technical at times but this, at least in my mind, enhances the course and at no point did I feel I was "drowning" in formulas. | lectures can feel rather technical at | Time | but this, at least in my | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | The video lectures are particularly clear and with a good balance between intuition and details. The assignments are interesting and they require some time even if they are not the most challenging. Nice the choice to use Graphlab but to give detailed instructions also for Pandas and leaving the possibility open to use different software. I will certainly take the following ones. If you are not interested in the the full specialization and already have some exposure to python notebooks, it is possible to follow this course without the previous one. | are interesting and they require some | Time | even if they are not the | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Programming assignment sometime ambiguious and hard to follow. A lot of time you have no idea WHICH dataset they are talking about e.g. "query house" in the last lesson. Overall it's a great course. | hard to follow. A lot of | Time | you have no idea WHICH dataset | Negative | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Pace is extremely slow. The instructor writes and talks simultaneously. The words are put so slow that it puts me off too sleep at times. I love taking courses where the instructor speaks at the right pace and keeps you involved. Carlos, the co instructor. One of the perfect MOOC is Calculus One by Jim Fowler | puts me off too sleep at | Time | I love taking courses where the | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | A great course that will take you way past what you may remember of linear regression from high school or college days. This course is part math, part algorithms and part application (in Python). I loved it. The instructors are good and the material is generally well presented (I took the course the first time through, so there seemed to be a few gaps / rough edges.) This course may be intimidating if you don't like mathematical notation, or if you have never used Python before. It may also be challenging if your high school / college freshman calculus is rusty. The concepts aren't super hard (basic statistics, integration, differentiation, matrix math but with multi-variate twists), but you will need to think carefully through some lessons to appreciate them. The online tests are good - and the instructions for each week's problems are detailed. There is enough guidance to clearly show what needs to be done, but enough gaps to bridge that you're made to think about the problem at hand. | (I took the course the first | Time | through, so there seemed to be | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | A very good course! Especially that scikit-learn can be used as framework for solving assignments and at the same time exercises for programming of learning algorithms from scratch. Thanks! | solving assignments and at the same | Time | exercises for programming of learning algorithms | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | To start with, I have been dedicating time to improve my understanding and depth in statistics and calculus. The reason is that, I am totally impressed by the lecture videos. The videos are detail, precise and covers enough depth. It has helped me to correlate the statistical concepts and application areas and rekindled my interest to go back to learn and strengthen my basics. I like the contents that its not a overdose of many mathematical equations. Appreciate the pains taken by the expert professors in explaining every detail possible to make the course more interesting. Appreciate the mention about the topics not covered in the course. My suggestion is to include a seperate section for each course with a list of reference books, topics and weblinks of material to increase our depth and breadth of technical understanding of the statistical methods. Many Thanks to Emily Fox and Carles Guestrin for their time and efforts in making this specialization course, and of course providing us with the free license to use Dato for learning purposes. | start with, I have been dedicating | Time | to improve my understanding and depth | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | To start with, I have been dedicating time to improve my understanding and depth in statistics and calculus. The reason is that, I am totally impressed by the lecture videos. The videos are detail, precise and covers enough depth. It has helped me to correlate the statistical concepts and application areas and rekindled my interest to go back to learn and strengthen my basics. I like the contents that its not a overdose of many mathematical equations. Appreciate the pains taken by the expert professors in explaining every detail possible to make the course more interesting. Appreciate the mention about the topics not covered in the course. My suggestion is to include a seperate section for each course with a list of reference books, topics and weblinks of material to increase our depth and breadth of technical understanding of the statistical methods. Many Thanks to Emily Fox and Carles Guestrin for their time and efforts in making this specialization course, and of course providing us with the free license to use Dato for learning purposes. | Fox and Carles Guestrin for their | Time | and efforts in making this specialization | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This is one of the most informative and useful online classes I've taken to date. The material covered is detailed and applicable broadly. It is also exceptionally hard! The assignments are very challenging and extremely precise. I struggled frequently and it ended up taking a significant amount of time, but it was extremely well worth it in the end. I'm very excited for the next class in the specialization! | up taking a significant amount of | Time | but it was extremely well worth | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very good course with detailed explanations, both great lecturers, lets you choose environment of your liking for the assignments(python and graphlab are preferred). The explanations are detailed and clear and assignments are very practical. One of the best courses and Specializations on the Coursera I have taken so far. If you contribute lot of time and effort, you will learn a lot. | far. If you contribute lot of | Time | and effort, you will learn a | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | A few minor glitches with the homework assignments so far. Hopefully this is only because it is the first time the class is being offered. I love the instructors. Great enthusiasm and both clearly love what they do. Inspiring for data scientists in training. | only because it is the first | Time | the class is being offered. I | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent. My favourite machine learning course since Andrew Ng's class. Thorough treatment. Took us from easier hand-holding to deep in the implementation details. Talked both about theoretical considerations as well as practical fine tuning. Would maybe liked to have seen a bit more talked about the problems with data that can affect model fit (multicollinearity / skew / etc) but time constraints don't allow it in an already excellently "meaty" course. | (multicollinearity / skew / etc) but | Time | constraints don't allow it in an | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I've studied machine learning quite a bit in school as well as on my own, but I wish this class was how I learned the first time around. Everything is explained so clearly and well-balanced between practical understanding vs underlying theory. Definitely serves as a good review for those of us who are looking to get back into machine learning! | was how I learned the first | Time | around. Everything is explained so clearly | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I was only able to complete week 1 to week 3 thoroughly, and random check on other weeks due to limited time at my disposal at this moment. In general, I found the course to be very interesting and an excellent introduction to building predictive models . Particularly , i appreciate the way mathematical formulations was explained to carry along beginners in this areas. Nonetheless, I would suggest that the general notation slide in week 2 should include concrete data example in a table to explain the notations ie. x[j], xi[j], etc | on other weeks due to limited | Time | at my disposal at this moment. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Adequate information to grasp on. Learn something useful. But the videos are a bit boring that sometimes I have a hard time to carry on. Hope to share more interesting video examples and reading materials. Good effort but spice up the video a bit with salient stuff instead of pure talking and notes would be good. | that sometimes I have a hard | Time | to carry on. Hope to share | Positive | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | The course is well presented and the content is packed with information and great techniques to use in your work world and in everyday life. I really enjoyed the lectures and Scott DeRue, besides being a world leader in his field, is an engaging and personable speaker who brings the course to life. Despite the course being very engaging and worthwhile, I am dismayed that you cannot take the tests if you do not buy the certificate of completion option. I understand purchasing the Course Certificate and understand that it costs time and resources to put this course together. However, since the tests are scored by a computer, the developers are not doing any work for free if they allow test access and scoring to those who choose not to buy the certificate option. By barring the those people from taking the tests, the MOOC suddenly becomes not so open anymore. People often wonder how a process or a product gets from A to B where it goes from open access to access for a limited few. This, the little step of denying access to test taking in courses that purport to be open, is that first step. Once this take further hold, more and more course will become less and less open and the MOOC system becomes the MOC system of just being Massive Online Courses. Please maintain the spirit of the MOOC by allowing testing access to all learners, not just to those who pay for the certificate. Thank you. | Certificate and understand that it costs | Time | and resources to put this course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I've taken a bunch of Coursera Courses, and these were my favorite. Fun to watch and packed with useful stuff I wish I had known a long time ago. | wish I had known a long | Time | ago. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I loved the course. Very clearly step by step, I could review my current situation, and the tips that were given were clean, ethical ways of handling people we find difficult to deal with in life. It was more like a self empowerment course. Both the facilitators were awesome, people I learnt to relate with within 4 weeks time. Their expertise and experience showed in each of their classes. The examples and experiments used were eye openers and very interesting. I watched and heard them more than once. I enjoyed the course thoroughly... Thank you! | to relate with within 4 weeks | Time | Their expertise and experience showed in | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I took this course as part of the Specialization. I wish I could put all the directors, VPs, and EVPs through this specialization. The tools, case studies, and resources alone make it worth the time and money. | resources alone make it worth the | Time | and money. | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Dear Coursera This was my first Coursera course at all. The course is in general is interesting and it give a good theoretical approach and examples how to turn this theory in practice. The discussion possibility is also very useful. Learning from your classmates is great. The discussions are respectfull and if somebody has a different opinion or view this is seen as "added value" and is not judged negatively. The only thing missing is the possibility to have live and direct conversation with the teachers. I did a training where we had the opportunity for one hour to ask questions in a chat and the teacher was answering them in a live webinar. That was really usefull and would make it a "five"***** star course. Overall, I would attend/take a Coursera training any time again. Great plattform! | would attend/take a Coursera training any | Time | again. Great plattform! | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | GREAT AND I LEARNED A LOT. I LL PAY FOR IT NEXT TIME I TAKE THIS COURSE | I LL PAY FOR IT NEXT | Time | I TAKE THIS COURSE | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Intresting to know what's happining around you all the time and how to practically deal with it. i recommed this course to all people. | what's happining around you all the | Time | and how to practically deal with | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | I thought all of the information was great but at times the course was just very bland especially in terms of presentation. Also, the title is somewhat misleading and the presumptions that the course creators make about its students assume I am a business guy sitting in an office or a part of some team which makes the activities that you HAVE to do in order to pass the course a bit harder to complete. This is good because if what the activity desn't really apply to your situation it makes good practice to imagine a situation - not soo imaginative the task is incredibly easy - and apply what you've learned. However, as I've said, if what you're being asked to do is harder to apply than the activity in many ways isn't all that practical. I prefer Cumulative tests as well because they assess everything you've learned and whether you've retained the information or not. | the information was great but at | Time | the course was just very bland | Negative | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | With the right balance of time spent on videos, good amount of scientific background supported by studies and excellent practical tips to put the theory into practice! Very clear language and simple / easy to follow structure. Learned a lot with it and highly commend it! Well done. | With the right balance of | Time | spent on videos, good amount of | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | It's not bad, but not amazing. I would recommend University of Michigan's Programming for Everybody (Python) over this course. While the game-oriented approach is fun, I don't like the excessive focus upon the simplegui module which was created by the instructors specifically for this course. You will learn some basic python concepts, but you'll spend way too much time learning how to use this module which you will likely never use again, and this is at the expense of learning how to use some of the more commonly used standard modules (eg datetime, sys, etc). I also found glitches in the materials, and many of the questions and grading rubrics are unclear or ambiguous. Very frustrating. | but you'll spend way too much | Time | learning how to use this module | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Great professors and great design of the course. It does not only cover all the main elements of how to code with python, it also incorporate them into game design so our interests of learning can keep high as always. I found this course very interesting and the guidelines and code clinic tips are very helpful. Especially the peer assessment, it provide opportunities for me to learn from other people's codes and provide advice to others' works meanwhile I can also think about my own code and enhance next time. Overall, I will strongly recommend this course to others that like to learn python or computer science. | my own code and enhance next | Time | Overall, I will strongly recommend this | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Fantastic! Joe Warren and Scott Rixner hit one out of the ballpark with this course. They really make programming accessible to anyone with the way that they teach, and they make the content really fun. Yes, the material can be challenging at some times, but with all the lectures, homework and support, I truly think anyone can finish this course. I'm enrolled in the full specialization and a note to others. Enroll in all the courses at once and then in your enrollments page you can adjust the sessions that you want to take by hitting the three dots button. I made the mistake of waiting till I finished part one to enroll in the next course and it caused me to skip a session so I had to sit around waiting for two weeks until the next session started. Programming is a language so it helps the learning process to work on it every day, don't make the same mistake I made! | material can be challenging at some | Time | but with all the lectures, homework | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | An amazing course. Professors are knowledgeable, fun, and contribute time and effort to the course. The content is fast-paced, but you end up learning a lot! | Professors are knowledgeable, fun, and contribute | Time | and effort to the course. The | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | I would like to see the end date of the course linked to the start date of the next course (Part 2) without a few week time lag, or a one week lead time. It would nice to have the option to keep going while the material is still fresh in my mind. | (Part 2) without a few week | Time | lag, or a one week lead | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | I would like to see the end date of the course linked to the start date of the next course (Part 2) without a few week time lag, or a one week lead time. It would nice to have the option to keep going while the material is still fresh in my mind. | lag, or a one week lead | Time | It would nice to have the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | I wouldn't give a star for this course; materials are prosaic (wordy); professors have not designed a truly high-tech course with automated grading; they want peers to grade each other - I don't like this euphemism, which is equivalent to the blind leading the blind; I do not want to spend my energy correcting other peoples' programming assignments; I want to spend the time thinking about programming and working on my own programs - the concept of collaboration is false - everyone wants to develop their own stuff not share with others so the premise of the course is inaccurate; also, the course has many long-winded texts of little use to the student; this is a course more about indoctrination in a legacy system than it is a course to liberate the mind through computers; while the content is interesting I am completely turned off by the amount of time I have to devote to commenting on other peoples' stuff - I am not a teacher - that is the teacher's job not my job - also, I do not like the condescension and clownishness of the profs in this course - I do not need to be entertained and all the talk about Monty Python, one of the corniest programs on TV trivializes the material - a no-nonsense, MIT type course is preferable - this is a course that I would avoid from the logistical perspective, although I will follow the material side of the course because it has substantial content and that includes the specialization - hello teachers in the course - automate the grading and remove all of the peer evaluations and start offering authentic instruction, not lazy instruction of students teaching students - the approach is typical of all legacy-oriented courses - the same goes for the Severance course at the University of Michigan - if the Rice course is supposed to instill interest in Rice University, this offering turns me away from Rice because one realizes that Rice is too legacy-oriented in its approach, same old, same old. | assignments; I want to spend the | Time | thinking about programming and working on | Negative | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | I wouldn't give a star for this course; materials are prosaic (wordy); professors have not designed a truly high-tech course with automated grading; they want peers to grade each other - I don't like this euphemism, which is equivalent to the blind leading the blind; I do not want to spend my energy correcting other peoples' programming assignments; I want to spend the time thinking about programming and working on my own programs - the concept of collaboration is false - everyone wants to develop their own stuff not share with others so the premise of the course is inaccurate; also, the course has many long-winded texts of little use to the student; this is a course more about indoctrination in a legacy system than it is a course to liberate the mind through computers; while the content is interesting I am completely turned off by the amount of time I have to devote to commenting on other peoples' stuff - I am not a teacher - that is the teacher's job not my job - also, I do not like the condescension and clownishness of the profs in this course - I do not need to be entertained and all the talk about Monty Python, one of the corniest programs on TV trivializes the material - a no-nonsense, MIT type course is preferable - this is a course that I would avoid from the logistical perspective, although I will follow the material side of the course because it has substantial content and that includes the specialization - hello teachers in the course - automate the grading and remove all of the peer evaluations and start offering authentic instruction, not lazy instruction of students teaching students - the approach is typical of all legacy-oriented courses - the same goes for the Severance course at the University of Michigan - if the Rice course is supposed to instill interest in Rice University, this offering turns me away from Rice because one realizes that Rice is too legacy-oriented in its approach, same old, same old. | turned off by the amount of | Time | I have to devote to commenting | Negative | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Great course, great instructors, was hard, but the community of learners was fantastic and helped out a lot. Pace is face, be ready to commit time to it. | is face, be ready to commit | Time | to it. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | I took this course 3 times as a student, and I absolutely loved it! The lectures are interesting, relevant, and entertaining. I'm grateful to be a CTA/Mentor. | I took this course 3 | Time | as a student, and I absolutely | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | huge waste of time, they will give you very little information and what is expected for you to be able to do with that information is astronomical, you will never learn any of the details of how computing works, how functions work, the mechanism behind these computations, or anything. To give you an example, you will first watch a horribly made video on boolean logic, alter going to youtube to get a better explanation of 'And', 'or' , and 'not', you'll see an example done with If, else, and elif, then be asked to do homework problems using and, or, not. This huge gap between the information given, and the information you are expected to know to solve the problems they give you is too large, I found differential equations easier than this | huge waste of | Time | they will give you very little | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| n2zunIlgEeWSMw6QLoDNsQ | Best computer programming series I've taken in Coursera so far (I've done principles 1 and algorithm thinking 1 already and in paralell). You can start in this very basic course and end in Algorithm Thinking which is a great course full of insights even for an experienced programmer as I'm (same is valid for the principles of programming, especially regarding the testing assignments) with no previous experience. My nephew is 15 years old and in high school and he is loving this course (having hard time though). To me, this specific course was very basic but as I didn't know anything of Python and as I love games I enjoyed a lot even though I already knew all of the material except for the Python part. | is loving this course (having hard | Time | though). To me, this specific course | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | A comprehensive course, good for building strong basics and a the same time prepares one for competitive coding. | strong basics and a the same | Time | prepares one for competitive coding. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | If one has taken the Algorithms 1 and 2 course by Profs. Sedgewick and Wayne, this course will be a disappointment and waste of time. | be a disappointment and waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Overall this was a good course. Some of the presenters need to work on their presentation skills (personally I had no problems with the accents). I also felt that the sections on dynamic programming seemed a bit rushed and I needed to spend a bit of time researching this on third parties before I felt comfortable completing the exercises. The grading system was really cool and the exercises seemed well thought-out and thorough. I'd recommend this course to existing developers without a computer science background. Those who want more mathematical rigour should look into the Tim Roughgarden/Stanford course. | needed to spend a bit of | Time | researching this on third parties before | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Def a useful skills to have when starting to interview for jobs. This is a hard course to teach to begin with. I found the lectures really boring, too long, hard to understand and just not really motivated well. I think the homework problem are good, but they are very time consuming. You need to use various methods to find edges cases and though that might be a good skill to have as well, it's just too much to get done in one week and somewhat frustrating when you're only stuck in one test case. I think this could be an excellent course with a few modification on the slides and adding more motivations and making shorter homework problems that focuses on the main part of the material for that as oppose to things we've already covered in the previous week. At the moment, I don't think I'll continue this specialization the way it's designed. | are good, but they are very | Time | consuming. You need to use various | Positive | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Really challenging, starts easy but gets heavy and time consuming after 3rd week. Be prepared to study additional material and spend some hours cracking the weekly assignments. Satisfying when you accomplish it. Maybe a good idea could be to combine algorithms and data structures and separate in 2 courses Algo & Data Structures 1, and Algo & DS 2. I feel, a better knowledge of DS could have help me to solve the Algo assignements faster. | starts easy but gets heavy and | Time | consuming after 3rd week. Be prepared | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Excellent quality, loved the quizzes and graded assignments, completely worth the time and money! Highly recommend! | and graded assignments, completely worth the | Time | and money! Highly recommend! | Positive | 0.84 | 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. | Rarely straying from the slides, the | Time | the presenters go into more depth | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Great course. The team is doing a great work improving it all the time and the grading system and lecture are really good as well. | great work improving it all the | Time | and the grading system and lecture | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | I took this course as part of the specialization and find it to be an excellent refresher of what I learned in undergraduate and graduate Computer Science classes (which were solely theoretical, and I had little chances to code algorithms/data structures). Finally, in this course, I could implement what I learned before and now. Not a perfect course - lectures could be improved (pseudo code at times takes efforts to understand). But assignments are amazing and comfortably challenging. The vast choice of programming languages is a feature. Make sure that you write automated unit-tests for your solutions. This will reduce your debugging efforts. Thanks! | could be improved (pseudo code at | Time | takes efforts to understand). But assignments | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | A great course in its own right but it also fills a void between the "Learn <programming language>" and using programming languages to analyze Big Data. The instructors have put together an excellent introduction to the wonderful, and scary, world of algorithms. I must admit I was ready to send my PC flying through the window on numerous occasions when I could not get my particular implementation of an algorithm to run within the time AND memory limits set by the instructors. More so, because often you are not told what particular test case made it fail. In the end, I believe this is a great approach to have learners really dive into the material and think about the various run times before submitting a particular solution. Well worth while your time! | an algorithm to run within the | Time | AND memory limits set by the | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | A great course in its own right but it also fills a void between the "Learn <programming language>" and using programming languages to analyze Big Data. The instructors have put together an excellent introduction to the wonderful, and scary, world of algorithms. I must admit I was ready to send my PC flying through the window on numerous occasions when I could not get my particular implementation of an algorithm to run within the time AND memory limits set by the instructors. More so, because often you are not told what particular test case made it fail. In the end, I believe this is a great approach to have learners really dive into the material and think about the various run times before submitting a particular solution. Well worth while your time! | and think about the various run | Time | before submitting a particular solution. Well | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | A great course in its own right but it also fills a void between the "Learn <programming language>" and using programming languages to analyze Big Data. The instructors have put together an excellent introduction to the wonderful, and scary, world of algorithms. I must admit I was ready to send my PC flying through the window on numerous occasions when I could not get my particular implementation of an algorithm to run within the time AND memory limits set by the instructors. More so, because often you are not told what particular test case made it fail. In the end, I believe this is a great approach to have learners really dive into the material and think about the various run times before submitting a particular solution. Well worth while your time! | particular solution. Well worth while your | Time | | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| 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. | 3 languages - so you spend | Time | working on algos, not on bootstrapping | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Update: As I proceed to wk 5, I know why there are some complaint on Dynamic programming, Reduced to 2 stars. Lectures are totally useless for the assignment, The course is really good until week 4 when it deteriorates very quick. No matter how many times I re-watch the lecture, I can't understand much. I ended up using wikipedia for the quiz instead :P I can't use much of the course forum since there are too many posts there and it keep crashing my chrome. This course gets my 3 stars from the first 3 weeks alone, otherwise it gonna be 0-2 stars. | very quick. No matter how many | Time | I re-watch the lecture, I can't | Negative | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | More information should be given for the failed test cases. Is a waste of time to find bug if you don't know what the bug is. ie test case 4/13 in the minimal dot product assignment | test cases. Is a waste of | Time | to find bug if you don't | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | Structures are started at the same | Time | It was difficult to find out | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | was difficult to find out the | Time | for both courses and spend enough | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | for both courses and spend enough | Time | to solve all assignments instead of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Even though this course covers a lot fundamentals for introduction to algorithm, the course itself is not designed as good as I expected. For starters, the weekly problem designs aren't very good. Some problem statements are ambiguous and not very clear unless you read more than one time or take a closer look at the examples. Often, the input format/arguments are designed to take redundant info. Some problem even has more than one possible correct outputs, which is just confusing for learning purpose. In terms of lecture videos, it's good that there are some classic algorithm problems being demonstrated in the video, however the linkage between how to express a problem in mathematical languages is poorly explained. For example, in the lecture of edit distance, the realization of the matrix was not well explained at all. I personally appreciate a lot of the thorough proving steps introduced in the lectures, however I personally think the proofs are often not well explained to the audience (I also understand that it's more difficult to explain proving steps). Considering the large variety of audience, I would recommend the instructors separate the comprehensive more in-depth knowledge into optional videos, in this way the audiences could decide if they want to spend time in optional videos or not based on their own needs, meanwhile the instructors could spend a little bit more time to explain the difficult concepts better. Overall, I know that talking and analyzing algorithms can be kinda of boring and challenging, but I wish the course videos could be stated in a more interesting and intriguing way. | unless you read more than one | Time | or take a closer look at | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Even though this course covers a lot fundamentals for introduction to algorithm, the course itself is not designed as good as I expected. For starters, the weekly problem designs aren't very good. Some problem statements are ambiguous and not very clear unless you read more than one time or take a closer look at the examples. Often, the input format/arguments are designed to take redundant info. Some problem even has more than one possible correct outputs, which is just confusing for learning purpose. In terms of lecture videos, it's good that there are some classic algorithm problems being demonstrated in the video, however the linkage between how to express a problem in mathematical languages is poorly explained. For example, in the lecture of edit distance, the realization of the matrix was not well explained at all. I personally appreciate a lot of the thorough proving steps introduced in the lectures, however I personally think the proofs are often not well explained to the audience (I also understand that it's more difficult to explain proving steps). Considering the large variety of audience, I would recommend the instructors separate the comprehensive more in-depth knowledge into optional videos, in this way the audiences could decide if they want to spend time in optional videos or not based on their own needs, meanwhile the instructors could spend a little bit more time to explain the difficult concepts better. Overall, I know that talking and analyzing algorithms can be kinda of boring and challenging, but I wish the course videos could be stated in a more interesting and intriguing way. | decide if they want to spend | Time | in optional videos or not based | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Even though this course covers a lot fundamentals for introduction to algorithm, the course itself is not designed as good as I expected. For starters, the weekly problem designs aren't very good. Some problem statements are ambiguous and not very clear unless you read more than one time or take a closer look at the examples. Often, the input format/arguments are designed to take redundant info. Some problem even has more than one possible correct outputs, which is just confusing for learning purpose. In terms of lecture videos, it's good that there are some classic algorithm problems being demonstrated in the video, however the linkage between how to express a problem in mathematical languages is poorly explained. For example, in the lecture of edit distance, the realization of the matrix was not well explained at all. I personally appreciate a lot of the thorough proving steps introduced in the lectures, however I personally think the proofs are often not well explained to the audience (I also understand that it's more difficult to explain proving steps). Considering the large variety of audience, I would recommend the instructors separate the comprehensive more in-depth knowledge into optional videos, in this way the audiences could decide if they want to spend time in optional videos or not based on their own needs, meanwhile the instructors could spend a little bit more time to explain the difficult concepts better. Overall, I know that talking and analyzing algorithms can be kinda of boring and challenging, but I wish the course videos could be stated in a more interesting and intriguing way. | could spend a little bit more | Time | to explain the difficult concepts better. | Negative | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | The course starts very promising, but it gets worse week after week, culminating on a barely understandable week about dynamic programming. That’s when I gave up and decided to write this review instead, with just one assignment missing to complete the course. Some of the teachers aren’t native english speakers, which is fine, but their english is very hard to understand. I found myself having to watch some portions of the videos over and over again in order to understand what was being said. I tried reading the transcripts instead, but the they’re even worse! It seems that they were automatically generated from the videos, thus suffering with the poor pronunciation. The teachers use mathematical sophistication that feels unnecessary, but to be fair, they do mention it on the FAQ as part of the necessary background. However, even though it’s an online course, they barely use any teaching method besides very raw slides, some dry mathematical proofs and someone speaking about the content. The only resources offered to help learning are a few open source visualizations. I expected much more. The only good aspect from this course are the assignment checkers, which allow you to write your solutions in multiple languages. I deeply regret the money and time I spent on this course. | I deeply regret the money and | Time | I spent on this course. | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | the content if very good, but lecturers are terrible. you better read slides and read any book you like. watching their videos it wast of time. | watching their videos it wast of | Time | | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | It's not too much work. For someone who wants to take programming classes online but also may have a variant amount of time, this course is perfect. | may have a variant amount of | Time | this course is perfect. | Positive | 0.96 | 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. | a lot. There were so many | Time | I'm convinced my algorithm can't be | Negative | 0.77 | 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. | Comprehensive grader: grades you on correctness, | Time | use, memory use. You have no | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Having time left on the last programming assignment in week 4 and not being allowed to complete it was a downer. I'm not sure if this was bug or if I'm missing something. The course was great and challenging. Thank you for preparing, organizing and teaching this course. | Having | Time | left on the last programming assignment | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | The best online class I've taken so far: not only because of the clear explanation and easy-to-follow videos, but also the effort the professors have put int answering most of the questions, especially Prof. Alex. He almost answered more than half of the questions within short amount of time. This is very rarely seen in other moocs. | the questions within short amount of | Time | This is very rarely seen in | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | good course with some very nice idea. I like the fact you can use a lot of languages for you programming assesment, the content is really helpful, I would like to have more indications from the grading system to save time. | from the grading system to save | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Nap1_eB0EeWHHAokaxVUhQ | This course seems great, although plenty of errors in the audio transcript. The steepness of the learning curve increased very quickly and understandability decreased after week 3, which made me drop the course. I hope to be able to retake it some time in the future with the right mathematical skills. | be able to retake it some | Time | in the future with the right | Positive | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It's really well made and it gives you all the time you need to learn and practice. I really enjoyed it even if that was my very first approach with java language. | and it gives you all the | Time | you need to learn and practice. | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | When I signed up for this course I had already taken a year's worth of Java classes and was quite well prepared. My overall opinion of the course is that it was really good and the instructors did a good job by presenting clear videos of some beginning - intermediate level concepts. I especially liked Christine's and Mia's presentations. The videos on memory models were really great and helped me a lot. The assignments were really interesting too as they collected and mapped real time data of earthquakes onto a map, but some of the external libraries being used in UnfoldingMaps could have been explained a little better as to what their implementations were. In the beginning it was a little confusing trying to figure out the superclasses even though the Javadocs for them were available. I also felt that the Interaction Design Lab in Germany - the folks who implemented the UnfoldingMaps could have made the Javadocs of their classes a little more detailed. Further explanation of how to use the classes built into the course would have been very helpful. Hence the 4/5 stars given. But overall I really enjoyed the class and am really looking forward to the second class in the sequence. Well done! | as they collected and mapped real | Time | data of earthquakes onto a map, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have been following this course since mid 2015 and I found it very good. But because of my busy schedule I usually switch the session. But this time I am really motivated to devote some time for this great course to learn OOP. I have learned a lot in my university about java programming but they did not teach us these stuff which are practiced. we solved a lot of problems there but they had nothing much about using java libraries and OOP. Thanks all the lecturers from UCSD and Coursera for such a great course. | usually switch the session. But this | Time | I am really motivated to devote | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have been following this course since mid 2015 and I found it very good. But because of my busy schedule I usually switch the session. But this time I am really motivated to devote some time for this great course to learn OOP. I have learned a lot in my university about java programming but they did not teach us these stuff which are practiced. we solved a lot of problems there but they had nothing much about using java libraries and OOP. Thanks all the lecturers from UCSD and Coursera for such a great course. | am really motivated to devote some | Time | for this great course to learn | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | in the beginning of the course i thought i'll get a good experience as usual on coursera, but i was wrong ... a lot of things >> to be introduced in next course confusing data types & working with things i don't know about it. you've said that, anyone with basics of programming could pass this course and after 6 months i couldn't. please be sure about the prerequisites next time. | be sure about the prerequisites next | Time | | Negative | 0.76 | 1.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is a great course. This is the first time I learnt an online course, which has so many advantages against traditional classroom instructions. | great course. This is the first | Time | I learnt an online course, which | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The topics are covered perfectly in such a way that every learner can digest the content by spending some time on them. After that, learners can able to learn most of the basics of OOP. The homeworks are also well designed and helpful. Thanks to the creators of this course and the instructors. | digest the content by spending some | Time | on them. After that, learners can | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course is very good explained. However the practice relies a lot in code that cannot be explained like applets or mapping components... Sometimes you need more time to go through the documentation of a graphic library that you will never use again than in doing the actual assignment's core thing. | . . Sometimes you need more | Time | to go through the documentation of | Positive | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | very well structured, maybe even a bit too much at some times :) | a bit too much at some | Time | :) | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Nice course. But peer assignment/reviews takes much more time than estimated 30 minutes. | But peer assignment/reviews takes much more | Time | than estimated 30 minutes. | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent course. Some courses that are "object-oriented" start with simple variable declarations and they are extremely boring to work through as there is very little progress in each week. Others assume you know a lot and they are very confusing. This one is very good if you have been exposed to programming before and want to learn object oriented approach. It isn't too easy or hard. Instructors take the time to explain concepts rather than simply using them. Highly recommended. | easy or hard. Instructors take the | Time | to explain concepts rather than simply | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is one of the best series of courses I came along in online MOOC platform, such a brilliant course, this whole specialization is brilliant, such a interesting projects, I'm disappointed that I live in country that isn't that much wealthy to help this Specialization and to be able to do Capstone Project , but I wish all the best hope to finish all in time, this is in my top 3 online MOOC Courses and I saw a lot of them. I wish all the best to this team and people that made this possible. | best hope to finish all in | Time | this is in my top 3 | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | University of California did a great job! Thank you guys! Great course, concept challenges are very helpful and surprisingly one additional week for finishing up was wonderful idea - it helped me to finish last assignment on time. | me to finish last assignment on | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very rigourous course. Very worth the time and effort. Taught real knowledge and skills while facilitated building a portfolio | Very rigourous course. Very worth the | Time | and effort. Taught real knowledge and | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very crisp explanations. Treatment on polymorphism was very good. The only thing I did not like was that we were forced to cast a few times during our assignments, and usually this is not a good practice to be taught to someone. | were forced to cast a few | Time | during our assignments, and usually this | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I liked the way that the professors insisted on understanding the mechanics behind the concepts learned, using the memory models and asking for that pen and paper for drawing them. I didn't find any pdfs with course notes containing the concepts discussed in a written form but I think I'll relisten some of the videos and write that notes for myself. I managed to understand quite a few object oriented concepts that were blurry for me before, thank you for that. Now, it's practice time, to avoid forgetting all that ! | you for that. Now, it's practice | Time | to avoid forgetting all that ! | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I learnt some good tricks on this course, it came at the this time for what I was doing at work. I recommend this course as it covers most of the basics, and encapsulated difficult parts, all you do call a method to do something. | course, it came at the this | Time | for what I was doing at | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Although I agree that the mapping library that is used for the programming assignments adds something visually interesting to the course, I felt that it added an unnecessary level complexity when it came understanding the object-oriented aspects of the language. I spent a lot of time trying to understand how to use a library that I won't likely use again just to be able to apply the core programming concepts being taught in that lesson. Having said this, I felt a good sense of accomplishment after getting through the final project. | language. I spent a lot of | Time | trying to understand how to use | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The lectures were too wordy and the lecturers tripped over their words too often (which wouldn't have made it so difficult to listen if the lectures hadn't been so wordy!). There was too much focus on high-level details of the course project and too little attention paid to technical details. This rendered the lectures simplistic, boring, and sometimes a waste of time. This felt like an introductory level course, made more difficult through poor teaching. Also, the slick web interface was slightly difficult to navigate in comparison to other Coursera courses. | boring, and sometimes a waste of | Time | This felt like an introductory level | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I like the projects, but always don't have enough time. | projects, but always don't have enough | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Super basic! The instructor goes super slowly and spends a lot of time on unnecessary stuff. Each video can be down in half the time | slowly and spends a lot of | Time | on unnecessary stuff. Each video can | Negative | 0.87 | 3.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Super basic! The instructor goes super slowly and spends a lot of time on unnecessary stuff. Each video can be down in half the time | can be down in half the | Time | | Negative | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This was a good introduction to the topic, although a little slowly paced for my tastes, but I am a long time professional programmer, so I have much more background to draw on than many of the students. I started with this course, which encouraged me to go back and take more from the sequence. I recommend taking them in order. | tastes, but I am a long | Time | professional programmer, so I have much | Negative | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| ngZrURn5EeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | It's a good course that covers a good amount of rich material in a short amount of time. Wish there was some more explanation on certain plugins we are using outside of just 'this is what you do'. Course files would help quite a bit when completing assignments, especially with the amount we are modifying our local projects. | material in a short amount of | Time | Wish there was some more explanation | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| Niihyrb2EeSNXyIAC0mVOQ | The Course material is great and is useful to refresh the concepts underlying dynamics of 3D motion in a short span of time. The course is very well structured and enjoyed thoroughly listening to the lectures by Dr. Whiteman. I have just one complaint though, model answers to the question in quiz are not available. So, it is difficult to compare the approach taken and validate the understanding. | motion in a short span of | Time | The course is very well structured | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| NiK99anHEeS88iIAC1WehA | The content is well modularized, introduces a range of topic, but is much more of a discourse than an introduction to to process of evaluating a policy challenge. Not many tactical ideas, mostly a survey of the policy challenges that a new generation of policy-makers and new stakeholders will face. So the focus is not on "how" but it introduces Public Policy as a concept in a nice discursive way worthy of your time. | nice discursive way worthy of your | Time | | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| NiK99anHEeS88iIAC1WehA | Fantastic and informative. At times, a little irrelevant or confusing to international students (the President can do what?), but the core message and information of the course are universal, fascinating and vital to our collective and individual future. Highly recommended. | Fantastic and informative. At | Time | a little irrelevant or confusing to | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| NjakpyWaEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I enjoyed studying history for the first time in my life. It is really insightful to see how design has evolved and still has influences from the past. | enjoyed studying history for the first | Time | in my life. It is really | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| NjakpyWaEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | it gives a good understanding of graphic design evolution from post second WW to contemporary time. Very focused on American design. | from post second WW to contemporary | Time | Very focused on American design. | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| nnd5lshWEeSA1yIACye2oA | nothing i can say that made me jump for joy. i fell asleep half the time. | joy. i fell asleep half the | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| NNe5CEW4EeW8ow5lHOiKYQ | As others have said, the first four courses were good - I learned a lot from the videos and materials. However, the capstone project was a waste of time. Why a company failing in its industry was chosen as the focus is beyond me. In addition, the concepts learned in the previous four courses were only about 1/3 of the requirements of this capstone project - the problem statement and strategy portions could have been done without having taken the four previous courses at all. This seemed like a very generic project with almost no collaboration between the professors who taught the previous four courses. I expected a lot more from a Wharton-led course - very disappointing. | capstone project was a waste of | Time | Why a company failing in its | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| NpTR4zVwEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Ambiguous assignments led to cumbersome completion. The peer grading got a little annoying as sometimes it took forever to get feedback and a lot of times feedback was minimal or the criteria for grading was vague and people took it WAY too seriously. | get feedback and a lot of | Time | feedback was minimal or the criteria | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course was very nicely organized for absolute beginners. I had done Web Development a long time back and was completely new to HTML5. Listening to the Video lectures and referring the suggested textbook "Missing Link An Introduction to Web Development and Programming" was very helpful. The quizzes were tricky. I recommend this course to anyone who is completely new to web development and who likes to learn the concepts and best practices in coding. | had done Web Development a long | Time | back and was completely new to | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is a great teacher!! I ve tried several times to learn html, this was the only one that I found fun and useful and with material that make sense and exercises that help you learn. | teacher! ! I ve tried several | Time | to learn html, this was the | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I would highly recommend this particular intro into HTML course as the instructor is especially thorough in walking you through the "rules" so-to-speak. I've taken several MOOCs, as I'm studying to be a Front End Developer. The UofM tutorial is by far the best I've completed, as she "filled in the gaps" others failed to cover. I've since enrolled in their CSS & JS courses; the CSS (I'm finding) is produced similarly and has already been an worthwhile investment of my valuable time. | an worthwhile investment of my valuable | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | It's really good for beginners! I didn't believe that at the beginning, because i was really new and it was hard for me to understand some things at first time. But if you don't give up, you will succeed! Lectures are simple and easy for understanding. I strongly recommend this course. | to understand some things at first | Time | But if you don't give up, | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | When I started this course, my only experience with HTML was <b> bold</b>, <i> italic</i>, and <u>underline</u>. After this course I have a much clearer understanding of what HTML is, and how it works, and I am able to now use it to a much greater extent than I was before. The professor did an excellent job of explaining most things, but I did find that on occasion I had to stop the video and go back several times to understand what she'd said or to take notes, despite having slowed the video down as much as possible. (In my opinion, one should be able to slow the video down more than is currently possible, especially for those for whom English is not their native tongue.) With me, it wasn't that I didn't understand what she said so much as I didn't have time to take in what she meant before she'd gone on to something else. I understand that Coursera is able to do what it does because of its method, which is basically independent study; one watches the videos, and reads whatever resources are listed, and goes on from there. If there is a question, it is not the professor in the videos that the question is asked of, but people hired as "teaching aides". These are the people (other than fellow students) who answer your questions, and they do not always answer in a 'timely' fashion. While this method works well for some people, I am quite sure there are others unable to learn with this method, especially if the subject turns out to be a more complicated, intensive one. Some people need to have a little more than just videos which they can only repeat over and over with the same information, hoping to learn something new from it. The only other thing I have a problem with is the lack of oversight/security. There's no way of knowing if the person who 'earns' a certificate is the person they claim to be, or if they earned the scores given. All in all, I think Coursera is a great tool, and well worth the low prices charged; I am sure there are plenty of courses still remaining (after the 'purge') that I would love to take. | the video and go back several | Time | to understand what she'd said or | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | When I started this course, my only experience with HTML was <b> bold</b>, <i> italic</i>, and <u>underline</u>. After this course I have a much clearer understanding of what HTML is, and how it works, and I am able to now use it to a much greater extent than I was before. The professor did an excellent job of explaining most things, but I did find that on occasion I had to stop the video and go back several times to understand what she'd said or to take notes, despite having slowed the video down as much as possible. (In my opinion, one should be able to slow the video down more than is currently possible, especially for those for whom English is not their native tongue.) With me, it wasn't that I didn't understand what she said so much as I didn't have time to take in what she meant before she'd gone on to something else. I understand that Coursera is able to do what it does because of its method, which is basically independent study; one watches the videos, and reads whatever resources are listed, and goes on from there. If there is a question, it is not the professor in the videos that the question is asked of, but people hired as "teaching aides". These are the people (other than fellow students) who answer your questions, and they do not always answer in a 'timely' fashion. While this method works well for some people, I am quite sure there are others unable to learn with this method, especially if the subject turns out to be a more complicated, intensive one. Some people need to have a little more than just videos which they can only repeat over and over with the same information, hoping to learn something new from it. The only other thing I have a problem with is the lack of oversight/security. There's no way of knowing if the person who 'earns' a certificate is the person they claim to be, or if they earned the scores given. All in all, I think Coursera is a great tool, and well worth the low prices charged; I am sure there are plenty of courses still remaining (after the 'purge') that I would love to take. | so much as I didn't have | Time | to take in what she meant | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This course is not about learning more, but learning better. And this will definitely leave you knowing more and better at the same time. Amazing introductory course. Straight to the point, teaches you valuable practices and guidelines to write HTML5 that not only works, but works correctly and is accessible for everyone. I recomend it not only for HTML beginners, but for anyone who likes to learn effectively. Thank you and congratulations to the amazing Lecturer of this course and anyone that has helped putting this course together. | more and better at the same | Time | Amazing introductory course. Straight to the | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Recommend for learners who get to know HTML for the first time. | to know HTML for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This course was not easy for an absolute beginner like myself. However, I was able to master the material by putting in extra time and effort. The instructor was clear and informatinve. This gave me a good beginning in coding. | the material by putting in extra | Time | and effort. The instructor was clear | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I learned a lot in a short time. It wasn't easy, but it was effective. Love the instructor. | learned a lot in a short | Time | It wasn't easy, but it was | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| 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. | excellent course. This is worth your | Time | and money. I highly recommend it | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I'd give it a 3.5, but it's not possible so I'm leaning more towards a 4 than a 3. The most positive thing about the course was Prof. van Lent who really knows her stuff. She also has a calm, soothing manner of explaining things and moves with it at the right pace. The content was easy to follow and quizzes were useful. Final assignment was messed up and they really should fix that, but the additional eight questions were basically a transcript of the code itself, and if you did your own code, you shouldn't have had any problem distinguishing the bad code from the good one. Extra stuff for those who successfully finished the course was a nice touch. The real downside of it all was the 'staff'. I got my question answered nine days after I posted it, when I had already finished. I've also seen some rude and condescending yet sparse answers to other students. Similar (but worse) things happen in CSS3 course as well. I don't know who those people are and how they got their jobs, but they should be replaced. Or sent to professional conduct and time management class. | Or sent to professional conduct and | Time | management class. | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is absolutely NOT for beginners. There is no way you can possibly do this class in under 10 hours a week. The presentations are sloppy and vague. There is absolutely no support, unless you count snark from the aids who check into the message boards once and a while to tell you your question is stupid. This woman chatters on way to fast and if you use the slower speed setting on the videos, it crashes every time. I am not happy that I wasted money on this class. It offers nothing to prepare you to actually do any real life HTML coding. I highly recommend either purchasing a book to learn on your own or take a class elsewhere. The Coursera platform is garbage. The app crashes and it doesn't seem to cooperate well with Safari so I have to lug around my laptop in order to get through this nonsense. | on the videos, it crashes every | Time | I am not happy that I | Negative | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating. | it wrong on the quiz three | Time | and it never did go through | Positive | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | A very simple, but effective intro to HTML. Looking forward to CSS3!! Take the time to read the optional chapters in the free book PDF as some of the questions in the assignments are not mentioned in lectures, but are explained in the book. | forward to CSS3! ! Take the | Time | to read the optional chapters in | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Thank you for you time and for everything you did. As an introduction, I did not find that there's need to talk about the hosting and the other things related to this topic. It would be better if the instructor went deeper into the HTML5. | Thank you for you | Time | and for everything you did. As | Positive | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | If you are looking a general HTML Course, this is for you. This provide general knowledge to create simple web pages, some basic HTML tags and a few practices. My expectation was to have a deeper knowledge of HTML5, spend more time reviewing difference between HTML5 version and the last ones but, I didn't get it, this why I'm giving just 3 starts | deeper knowledge of HTML5, spend more | Time | reviewing difference between HTML5 version and | Positive | 0.75 | 3.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Well structured course with a lecturer that is really nice to listen to. For me it was time well spent. | listen to. For me it was | Time | well spent. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Thank you for the course! It was challenging in some way and VERY interesting. Besides, it is really stimulating in terms of self-learning as some aspects are mentioned but briefly. Personally I had some trouble with navigation, which made me spent a lot of time browsing the Internet for some information. But as they say no pains, no gains:) Thank you, Colleen! Looking forward to CSS course. | made me spent a lot of | Time | browsing the Internet for some information. | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Great course, great professor, but terrible, time wasting, frustrating, not educational (no feedback at all) evaluation "machine". | Great course, great professor, but terrible, | Time | wasting, frustrating, not educational (no feedback | Negative | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Couple hiccups with the autograder, but otherwise this course was very good. After messing around with HTML for years, it was about time I learned what the deal with HTML5 is. Just the right length, and definitely an Easy level of difficulty. | HTML for years, it was about | Time | I learned what the deal with | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is a very nice introductory course. Although I have experience with HTML, I appreciate the fact that it assumes no previous knowledge and takes the time to show beginners how to create and save an HTML file for the first time, as well as some of the editors that are available. Three weeks is a bit short, in my opinion. I would have liked to see forms being covered a bit, even if the actual handling is postponed until JavaScript is covered. I was also expecting for the canvas tag to at least be mentioned. Overall, an excellent course for beginners! | no previous knowledge and takes the | Time | to show beginners how to create | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is a very nice introductory course. Although I have experience with HTML, I appreciate the fact that it assumes no previous knowledge and takes the time to show beginners how to create and save an HTML file for the first time, as well as some of the editors that are available. Three weeks is a bit short, in my opinion. I would have liked to see forms being covered a bit, even if the actual handling is postponed until JavaScript is covered. I was also expecting for the canvas tag to at least be mentioned. Overall, an excellent course for beginners! | an HTML file for the first | Time | as well as some of the | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Colleen, the instructor, was very good. The autograder was not good and wasted people's time. | was not good and wasted people's | Time | | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Excellent class. Video lectures are very accessible and good content. The automatic parser is a pain, and can be improved. I spent a lot of time to get code that was working and giving the correct output to pass the tests. | improved. I spent a lot of | Time | to get code that was working | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | The course information was fairly useful, but the execution not so much. The material spent more time on somewhat repetitive examples than it did on explaining the actual concepts those examples were illustrating, and the videos were primarily just lecturers reading parts of the slides that you had already read, but in their own words. The tests, sadly, were poorly-designed for the subject matter of the course. Behavioral biases - like many psychological phenomena - overlap to some degree, and the frequently-used format of 'choose all that apply' - or worse 'choose all that might apply' - resulted in trying to guess what the test-setter was looking for rather than trying to apply the information that had been learned. When you find yourself trying to decide between the best answer based on what you have learned and a conceptually worse answer that happens to meet the wording of the question - and trying to guess whether the test-setter is looking to prove your understanding or catch you in a mistake - then you start to suspect that the course has been designed more as a way to earn grades than to actually learn. | so much. The material spent more | Time | on somewhat repetitive examples than it | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several | Time | asking questions that are never even | Negative | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | The video lectures are not adequate, too much self-study effort is needed to have a good understanding of the subject. The time allocated for this topic is not enough. | good understanding of the subject. The | Time | allocated for this topic is not | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| nUeuF3EkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | The content of the course is very good, but I guess there always are few people. My submission of assignments could not have been reviewed for a long time. | have been reviewed for a long | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| Nyq7nXzPEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Very challenging but quite informative. Time intensive. You do need to focus all your mental faculties to take it all in. | Very challenging but quite informative. | Time | intensive. You do need to focus | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| Nyq7nXzPEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Admittedly, some topics (especially neural signaling) could be explained so much more simply. Professor White sometimes picks the most random starting points to explain a new topic rather than explaining the subject matter in a Point A-Point B manner. Other times, there are other topics where information is omitted in an attempt to not overcomplicate the subject, although sometimes that omitted information could have easily helped to explain what the professor was talking about. That said, this is an incredibly thorough, clear, yet manageable course. This course has the hands-down best resources (lecture notes, clinical case studies, interactive anatomy program, and a separate website) of any Coursera class I've taken. I've learned more from this class than any single class I've taken on Coursera or in college. Hats off and big thanks to Professor White, Ellen Vos, and everyone involved in this course. | a Point A-Point B manner. Other | Time | there are other topics where information | Positive | 0.74 | 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. | was a ridiculous waste of my | Time | The videography was totally unprofessional. Shaky | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| o4yIjxxHEeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | better pace for people like me who need a bit more time to get it fixed in my head. Nice videos and easy to follow | me who need a bit more | Time | to get it fixed in my | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | It was a very interesting course and I like it very much. Thank everyone, who have been spending time to create it | Thank everyone, who have been spending | Time | to create it | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | Great! Concise and comprehensive at the same time! Exactly what an introductory class should offer you: a good presentation of the field and a healthy sense of curiosity. | Concise and comprehensive at the same | Time | Exactly what an introductory class should | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| O6SzVx2GEeSKwCIACzUCbQ | I'm leaving because I can't keep up with an 8 week course given in 4 weeks, and even less if the course keep on refering to the 8 weeks time frame. A pity, I loved this course. | on refering to the 8 weeks | Time | frame. A pity, I loved this | Positive | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| o7P0ctXYEeWFqw71fuUDrw | I was excited when I got started with the course. When I completed it, I'd say that I became inspired to learn and find out more about the subject. The lessons are really interesting and thought-provoking at times. But if there will ever be a good find in this course, it is going to be Mike - an expert in the field of planetary science and one who is very enthusiastic about solar system. Best course! | are really interesting and thought-provoking at | Time | But if there will ever be | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| o7P0ctXYEeWFqw71fuUDrw | This is an absolutely amazing class. You will learn a great deal about the story behind our solar system, and the competing theories behind some of what has happened. It's wonderful, interesting, and at times even funny. It is worth every second of frustration and effort I put in. I only took two science classes in college. If you have never taken a college level science class, this may be difficult. But it is extremely rewarding. If you struggle, keep fighting. You'll get there! | happened. It's wonderful, interesting, and at | Time | even funny. It is worth every | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| o7P0ctXYEeWFqw71fuUDrw | Who only five stars? Because that is all I have to give. I'm sorry, this course deserves more. I am repeating this course,but not because I need to. I passed last year, but I know that there will be new material that I want to learn. I'm pleased to see that there are familiar faces from last year. Prof. Mike Brown obviously know his stuff, and enjoys communicating it to students. There are plenty of references for students who want to explore things further. The discussion forums are excellent, with people sharing information, and Mike somehow finds the time to monitor the forums and contribute to the discussion. | information, and Mike somehow finds the | Time | to monitor the forums and contribute | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| O941HzsyEeWjyxInT4zYJQ | This course was mostly working on the same document, and refining it for six weeks. I kind of wanted a little more from the class beside extended peer review time. I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the specialization's courses, but I didn't think this one was quite up to the same caliber. | the class beside extended peer review | Time | I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of | Positive | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Great start. Many promises. But week 3 and 4 go in a wrong direction. Instead of speaking about Strategy - author goes into unrelated fields. Trash bins as a reference of a new strategical approach - misses a point that it is not a mass product. What strategical decisions did it involve that were not related to marketing? Almost none. Strategy is much, much wider term. Regarding new tendencies... Globalization has happened yesterday... Today it's time to open new horizons in relation to application of IT solutions to management problems. After AlphaGo proved that a computer program is more skillful in a complex game of GO than one of the top human players - it will not take much to the next step - strategical decision making on a corporate level. What companies need to do today? Infrastructure - probably. New organizational structure? - Definitely. | happened yesterday. . . Today it's | Time | to open new horizons in relation | Positive | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Really its very great to learn in coursera platform. This course is been very useful for me to understand all time business strategies from 1970's til now. | useful for me to understand all | Time | business strategies from 1970's til now. | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This is a highly recommended course and the content is second to no other on Coursera at the time of this review. I have taken all of the courses in the series from Copenhagen Business School, as well as nearly all other business management courses offered for other institutions. This specific course on Strategic Management is the single most informative and current material of all of the options. It does not answer every question or address every concept you would need to know to run a major corporation, but it is a fantastic overview of past and present methods of business strategy, and is of value to any business minded individual. I highly recommend this course and the entire series from CBS. Enjoy! | no other on Coursera at the | Time | of this review. I have taken | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I had rated this course 4 star earlier but, I am downgrading it to 2 star now as the course managers - coursera + CBS seem to have abandoned the coursera while the program is still running and being charged upwards of hundreds of dollars. The final peer assignment date has passed by close to 2 weeks and the grading process is not completed, neither there is any communication from course managers about the same. Very disappointing from Coursera and CBS. For free, the course may be still useful as early introduction to strategy but as paid course, refrain for the time being. My earlier review below. ----- Delivery of the course - presentation, videos, sequencing and articles for each video are very well organized and executed. Referring cases studies is good as well. However, the material seems simplified and is very much a basic course and not intermediate or advanced course. Additionally, the quizzes are very simple and have ample room to increase the difficulty level in order to make the course more challenging. | as paid course, refrain for the | Time | being. My earlier review below. ----- | Negative | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Explanations are clear, the lenght of the videos is ideal for someone who likes to study on weekdays but also has a full time job. I've read some of Mitzberg and Porter's work, and this course encompases their ideas but does not just stay with that, they add new approaches for actual and future businesses | weekdays but also has a full | Time | job. I've read some of Mitzberg | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Very happy with this course! Started out funny and relaxed, and maintained the relaxed edge whilst remaining challenging at the same time. Lots of reading material really challenged me to read more and to give more in the final assignment. | whilst remaining challenging at the same | Time | Lots of reading material really challenged | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Short bites regarding strategy and it concepts. A lot of information in a short time but very well presented. | lot of information in a short | Time | but very well presented. | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Great overview of Strategy and how he word, as well as it's meanings have used over time. | as it's meanings have used over | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | Wonderful experience for someone who has been out of university for so long. Will be spending time reading the philosophers much more carefully. I had to read too fast in order to do the writing assignments, unfortunately. It is ironic that the writing assignments are to make one reflect and learn, but they force one to read too quickly rather than to enjoy the readings. Good course, however. | for so long. Will be spending | Time | reading the philosophers much more carefully. | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | I advice NOT to take this course. Why: the professor is never there to read your assignments. He leaves that totally to other students like yourself, to grade your written assignments, and, they do not read and give you a RANDOM grade in 2 seconds. Don't take it, you will waste sooo much time on this one. | it, you will waste sooo much | Time | on this one. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | Enjoying the lectures again. This is my second time listening to the lectures and doing some of the readings. Thank you Professor Roth. | lectures again. This is my second | Time | listening to the lectures and doing | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | Hey, Was a learning course. Ben learned more about the treatment time. I simultaneously following a different course on art: Gogh History of Impressionism which was about the same period. Regards Frank Terpoorten | Ben learned more about the treatment | Time | I simultaneously following a different course | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | THE most interesting lecturer I have found in recent times. Wonderfully enlightening approach to the subjec. Thank you | lecturer I have found in recent | Time | Wonderfully enlightening approach to the subjec. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | It's a little annoying, because the videos are the same all the time... but the professor is very good, he knows so much about filosofy! | videos are the same all the | Time | . . but the professor is | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| ODnbKv_6EeSa0SIACyGBQw | though the flow of ideologies eventually became distinguishable, the comments on the several artists and philosophers noted were woefully uninformed and inadequate, even distorted, and the professor's eventual humming and hawing, irritating in the extreme, suggested that he was not at all prepared for his lectures - the final presentation of paintings without commentary at all was thus both a relief from his indecision and, at all of twenty minutes, an outrageous waste of time having left all of these however masterful works without any appreciable context | twenty minutes, an outrageous waste of | Time | having left all of these however | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| ofcUj5MCEeWI6BJRAK7IKQ | I found this course lacking in providing sufficient coverage of the basics in the course videos and lacking a useful and directed reading list. I spent far too much time researching command syntax and using try and error to find what worked with the provided code. Disappointing as topics covered are good. | list. I spent far too much | Time | researching command syntax and using try | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| olJcuUKiEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | The worst Coursera course I have taken. Total waste of time. The lectures are boring and have no real content. The supplementary materials are good though. | I have taken. Total waste of | Time | The lectures are boring and have | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | I found this course to be excellent. I really enjoyed the content and learned so very much. My only criticism is not of the course content but simply the nature of the course. I am currently working full time and doing a Masters degree part time, and I did this on top of that, so I found the work load to be exceptionally heavy. Not a problem for someone who isn't working though. Superb course - thank you. | course. I am currently working full | Time | and doing a Masters degree part | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | I found this course to be excellent. I really enjoyed the content and learned so very much. My only criticism is not of the course content but simply the nature of the course. I am currently working full time and doing a Masters degree part time, and I did this on top of that, so I found the work load to be exceptionally heavy. Not a problem for someone who isn't working though. Superb course - thank you. | and doing a Masters degree part | Time | and I did this on top | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Dr Moerman is passionate about qualitative research and does use some interesting examples to illustrate his ideas, some of which are drawn from his own research experiences. Do note that if you were to take this course, you need time because the assignments are time consuming and the videos are (I think) a little longer than they really need to be. Also, some of the assignments are designed in a pretty strange way (e.g. one week's assignment requires a shocking 10 peer reviews to pass but when I took the course, there were only a few submissions). This probably means I can't get my cert until the next session starts - if I'm lucky! | to take this course, you need | Time | because the assignments are time consuming | Negative | 0.63 | 2.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Dr Moerman is passionate about qualitative research and does use some interesting examples to illustrate his ideas, some of which are drawn from his own research experiences. Do note that if you were to take this course, you need time because the assignments are time consuming and the videos are (I think) a little longer than they really need to be. Also, some of the assignments are designed in a pretty strange way (e.g. one week's assignment requires a shocking 10 peer reviews to pass but when I took the course, there were only a few submissions). This probably means I can't get my cert until the next session starts - if I'm lucky! | need time because the assignments are | Time | consuming and the videos are (I | Negative | 0.71 | 2.0 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Very clear and concise explanation with fantastic examples to help with retaining information. The lecturer is full of life and it is very contagious. I joined this course to learn more about qualitative research. I am not new to qualitative research but i learn more each time I revisit the subject. If you intend to conduct some form of qualitative research as part of your job or preparation towards a postgraduate research degree, this course is a must enrol. Excellent | research but i learn more each | Time | I revisit the subject. If you | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Great course! It gave me some great new viewpoints from which to problem solve. The case studies were relevant and interesting, and the guest speakers were good as well. I wish discussions had been a little more structured - it was kind of a free-for-all which led to a lot of off-topic nonsense to weed through. After the second week, I really stopped checking in because it was too time consuming and that's a little sad. But that would be my only suggestion for improvement. | checking in because it was too | Time | consuming and that's a little sad. | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Interesting course that clearly describes design thinking. Some of the lectures are really excellent, although some did not meet my expectations. My only other problem was that at times I felt more like I was watching an advert for the course creator's book rather than learning about Design Thinking. | only other problem was that at | Time | I felt more like I was | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Thanks a lot Jeanne for making available this course on Design Thinking. It was a clear materialisation of the process for exploring opportunities for innovation. i also love the slides with great formalisations of some concepts. Maybe one more thing, it was very useful to have a short overview of previous week at the beginning of a new module. it is coherent with how we manage our MOOC learning behavior, with sometime a lack of time and long periods away from tje course. Joel. | behavior, with sometime a lack of | Time | and long periods away from tje | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| op_vMOGiEeWr4g7T_DyXNw | Great, and highly relevant/topical, content. However I found the quiz assignments to be needlessly tedious at times. | assignments to be needlessly tedious at | Time | | Negative | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| op_vMOGiEeWr4g7T_DyXNw | Very well taught, easy to understand. The questions in the exams have been very thoughtfully selected, one must pay attention to the content and understand the concept. Going to remember the concepts for long time after watching & listing the tutorials. | to remember the concepts for long | Time | after watching & listing the tutorials. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | This course is really helpful for the guys who want to improve their speech in public, and could give more power for the learners in this course. I would try to finish this course and believe that if I do, I will make a progress for my public speech skill.Even though I am not sure I have a enough time to take park in, but I would use every little time to enter this class. Thank you for the teachers of this class. | not sure I have a enough | Time | to take park in, but I | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | This course is really helpful for the guys who want to improve their speech in public, and could give more power for the learners in this course. I would try to finish this course and believe that if I do, I will make a progress for my public speech skill.Even though I am not sure I have a enough time to take park in, but I would use every little time to enter this class. Thank you for the teachers of this class. | but I would use every little | Time | to enter this class. Thank you | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | Certainly a great and useful topic considering PS skill take a long time to nurture, and good speakers are not born, they trained themselves. Also the respectable instructor interact with the students in a lively and efficient manner. Keeping it all simpler | considering PS skill take a long | Time | to nurture, and good speakers are | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | I will recommend it to every person I know. I wish I was taught one when I was in school. I cannot think of someone that could not benefit from it. Cheers Matt! (please do not take it out, I will keep on returning to it many times) | keep on returning to it many | Time | | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | very useful but need more time to study it ,,,, very pretty course | very useful but need more | Time | to study it , , , | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | I appreciate course material ,video classes and format of course. Specially it provide freedom education at any time at any place.with your own time. | it provide freedom education at any | Time | at any place. with your own | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | I appreciate course material ,video classes and format of course. Specially it provide freedom education at any time at any place.with your own time. | at any place. with your own | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | I have not finish the course yet, but so far the information has been very clear, and this MOOC is something I can practice in so many different ways that I really feel like this has been a great way to invest my time. | a great way to invest my | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| OrpXgQt0EeS5diIACoo5jQ | the course is helpful but not very interesting. i have lost interest at looking at the videos a number of times. the same background and the same set up looks very monotonous. | at the videos a number of | Time | the same background and the same | Positive | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| oSAFEslDEeWCSBJ1_yk7Tw | Great course. I only wish there was more time spent on dealing with more complex situations such as overfitting. | I only wish there was more | Time | spent on dealing with more complex | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| OUTGOrvTEeWuCAqiwoZfSw | Awesome and easy course! A must for the beginners or for a quick revision. I completed this 4 weeks course in 4 days.. I know 4 days are alot more of a time but i hardly studies for 3 hours per day.. Great course.. looking forward for other courses as well in this specialization. | days are alot more of a | Time | but i hardly studies for 3 | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| oZwETNccEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | This is an amazing opportunity unfortunately I have to catch up. I plan on doing this on the 3 day weekend. I have put time aside specifically for my classes. I have already put it to practice just haven't had a chance to do the quiz on lesson 1 or work on lesson 2. Again this is really a great way to help people out. Hopefully I will be in a position to get some certificates out of it as well. Thank you for this wonderful experience. :) | 3 day weekend. I have put | Time | aside specifically for my classes. I | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| O_jWsQCnEeWKrCIAC49PHA | I thank you so much for creating this course. It has helped me right now and will help me in the future. I can tell you that your video player is very efficient. It streams very well and all teachers that were involved in this program did a very good job with their topics and were able to get it right to the finest points. Thanks again for everybody involved and that has dedicated time to put this online program together. Sincerely, Steve Cardona | everybody involved and that has dedicated | Time | to put this online program together. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great course! easy to go through, but intensive and deep at the same time | intensive and deep at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I can not believe how much I've learned and how comfortable I feel. Getting better all the time. Dr. Chuck's courses are wonderful and with some good self-study on top of the course, you'll be doing some pretty cool stuff in no time. Looking forward to continuing on this path. :) | I feel. Getting better all the | Time | Dr. Chuck's courses are wonderful and | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I can not believe how much I've learned and how comfortable I feel. Getting better all the time. Dr. Chuck's courses are wonderful and with some good self-study on top of the course, you'll be doing some pretty cool stuff in no time. Looking forward to continuing on this path. :) | some pretty cool stuff in no | Time | Looking forward to continuing on this | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent course with an excellent teacher, I had a hard time completing the last assessment but I finally did it by my own! That's what I like the most of this course, that for people like me who are not used to programming, it turns out to be challenging yet it leaves you with a great satisfaction when completed. | excellent teacher, I had a hard | Time | completing the last assessment but I | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Few times, Explanations on Assignments were necessary. | Few | Time | Explanations on Assignments were necessary. | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Its was an interesting course. I wanted to learn python from such a long time and thank you University of Michigan and Coursera for bringing the course to me. and thank you Prof. Severance for teaching me python in such a wonderful way. I m looking forward to taking similar Courses in future. | learn python from such a long | Time | and thank you University of Michigan | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | By the end of this course you will feel 10 times more proficent then before taking it! | this course you will feel 10 | Time | more proficent then before taking it! | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great course, worth spending time on. | Great course, worth spending | Time | on. | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I loved this course due to lot of reasons. Class materials are available, if you have completed on time, then mail notification Class assignments | available, if you have completed on | Time | then mail notification Class assignments | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | This class is tough and time flies. No more intro stuff. This is is where we really start to get into some heavy programming (at least for my endurance level) | This class is tough and | Time | flies. No more intro stuff. This | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Python Data Structures is a great course for anyone who is interested in learning computer programming. The concepts taught here are very relevant to the field of Computer Science and apply to any programming language. The fact that this course uses Python for teaching programming is not a limitation, but rather a boon for students who may be intimidated by other programming languages. Python is easy and very fun to learn. It is also utilized by many large companies for things such as data analysis and modeling, so developing a fluency with Python is a valuable skill. Dr. Chuck speaks and teaches well, and he is very enthusiastic about the subject of Computer Science. My favorite thing about him is that he shows multiple examples during lectures. It also helps that he knows how to relax and have fun at times. I highly recommend him to any student! | to relax and have fun at | Time | I highly recommend him to any | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great building block from the Programming for Everybody Course! Challenging at times for someone with no programming experience but definitely worthwhile. Thanks Dr Chuck | Programming for Everybody Course! Challenging at | Time | for someone with no programming experience | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Awesome experience. Dr. Chuck is a good teacher, gives real time examples, walked us through his world tour. Perfect Videos , sessions.I would give 10/10 for Dr.Chuck , Sir you are the best. | is a good teacher, gives real | Time | examples, walked us through his world | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Nice job ! However some of the important points have been skipped and focus has been limited at times.The best part of the course were the lab assignments.Hope quizzes were better in standard. | and focus has been limited at | Time | The best part of the course | Positive | 0.85 | 3.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Easy to follow, slow paced. Perfect for non-programmers to learn programming for the first time. | to learn programming for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The course was perfect for my current circumstances. I have been working for quite some time and wanted to freshen my skill set. These courses fit perfectly into the busy schedules of modern families. I strongly encourage other associates to consider taking the courses as well. They can easily fit into a Sunday afternoon or after work, if not exhausted. The content of the course improved upon the first course, and touched on subjects I was curious about but never completely understood. I plan to take more courses as it develops interests into skills without the HUGE expense and pressure of a degree type program which would not fit into my current life. | have been working for quite some | Time | and wanted to freshen my skill | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent Way to learn Python. I am completely new to programming, but able to complete the course with in the time and now I am comfortable with the basics python programming. Charles made it a simple thing. His way of teaching, taking it step by step is very nice. Assignments are simple and at the same time ensures that we are good to go to next chapter. Support for questions while doing assignments is great. Thanks to University of Michigan for allowing us completing assignments as well, without payment. This is very great. Giving chance to every one to complete assignments and in addition providing support during assignments is actually shows the social commitment of University that education should be available to every one . | complete the course with in the | Time | and now I am comfortable with | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent Way to learn Python. I am completely new to programming, but able to complete the course with in the time and now I am comfortable with the basics python programming. Charles made it a simple thing. His way of teaching, taking it step by step is very nice. Assignments are simple and at the same time ensures that we are good to go to next chapter. Support for questions while doing assignments is great. Thanks to University of Michigan for allowing us completing assignments as well, without payment. This is very great. Giving chance to every one to complete assignments and in addition providing support during assignments is actually shows the social commitment of University that education should be available to every one . | are simple and at the same | Time | ensures that we are good to | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Things are really starting to get interesting. Videos are generally very helpful. I had a tough time with the lecture on tuples. That one may require some fine tuning (or maybe I require some). | very helpful. I had a tough | Time | with the lecture on tuples. That | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Consider my review this time. | Consider my review this | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | This is the second course by Dr Chuck that I've completed. Again, never thought I'd get into programming, let alone find it fun. Dr Chuck is excellent at explaining concepts, and turning incomprehensible jargon into bite-sized chunks. This second series takes more time and effort than the first Programming for Everybody course. I made sure to review again and again, and yet again, prior to tackling the assignments. | chunks. This second series takes more | Time | and effort than the first Programming | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent course, a little challenging at times, but a great learning experience | Excellent course, a little challenging at | Time | but a great learning experience | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Took this as "Programming for Everybody"--my very first programming class. Loved it. It was hard from time to time, but well worth it. It's not likely I will do programming for a living, but understanding this medium makes a big difference for me when I encounter issues related to technology, data and the web. I believe everyone benefits from some exposure to the world of programming. And this is by far the best course offered online. This part of the class isn't always easy, especially if one starts from scratch. But persist--the course is so well structured that eventually everything comes together. | Loved it. It was hard from | Time | to time, but well worth it. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Took this as "Programming for Everybody"--my very first programming class. Loved it. It was hard from time to time, but well worth it. It's not likely I will do programming for a living, but understanding this medium makes a big difference for me when I encounter issues related to technology, data and the web. I believe everyone benefits from some exposure to the world of programming. And this is by far the best course offered online. This part of the class isn't always easy, especially if one starts from scratch. But persist--the course is so well structured that eventually everything comes together. | It was hard from time to | Time | but well worth it. It's not | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Somewhat dissapointed that only the built in Datastructures were discussed and done so with too much time. | and done so with too much | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I really enjoyed this course and its prequel. Dr. Chuck, you are a wonderful teacher and I really appreciate the efforts and time you have put into each video. It almost feels like a breeze learning with you. I have learned a lot from your courses and hopefully will complete the specialisation in the future. | I really appreciate the efforts and | Time | you have put into each video. | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | good use of your time | good use of your | Time | | Negative | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | For first time programmers this seems to be perfect. Coming from multiple other languages it would be nice to be able to (temporarly) hide the detailed hints to the steps in the programming assignments. | For first | Time | programmers this seems to be perfect. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Read the material and try , do not give up every time you are blocked, if you read more beyond this course, everything turns out easier as you thought. | , do not give up every | Time | you are blocked, if you read | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very good course... Stressing at times. I very much liked Charles, good at teaching | good course. . . Stressing at | Time | I very much liked Charles, good | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I enjoy how Charles has broken up the Python lectures in to bite sized pieces. It makes learning a lot easier to schedule. I've even taken other Python courses at the same time to taylor my educational needs. | other Python courses at the same | Time | to taylor my educational needs. | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Outstanding Course for a newby. All about programming. Lectures and problems are clear and relate directly to the subject not related topics like statistics and other disciplines which add nothing to the Python and Python programming focus. Dr. Severance has built a great specialization here. Problems can be challenging but doable within the time frame represented by the course description (give or take a couple hours on some of the more challenging ones. I've learned alot! Thanks | be challenging but doable within the | Time | frame represented by the course description | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent! It escalates the level of complexity being at the same time awesomely explained, and as opposed to my expectations there's a lot of people available to provide feedback -- having mentors available and the discussion threads is really great. | of complexity being at the same | Time | awesomely explained, and as opposed to | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Highly recommend! Dr.Chuck is so fun!!!!! Moreover, his teaching style is awesome. The exercise is awesome. It's completely worth the money and time I spent! | It's completely worth the money and | Time | I spent! | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Well developed, very clear and fast movement at the same time. Good exercises to practice. The method of teaching is encouraging and not boring at all. | and fast movement at the same | Time | Good exercises to practice. The method | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Big times! | Big | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Thorough explanation, good pace for people that need time to take in the information. | good pace for people that need | Time | to take in the information. | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | very practical and easy to get the gist. But reading the book is still recommended each time before and after the lecture. | the book is still recommended each | Time | before and after the lecture. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Easy to understand. Gets you up to speed in using Python in no time. | speed in using Python in no | Time | | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Overall well constructed with a wealth of information in a short time span | wealth of information in a short | Time | span | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Paced right for a person working a full time job and Dr. Chuck explains the material in an easy to understand fashion. Well worth the time to take this class. | for a person working a full | Time | job and Dr. Chuck explains the | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Paced right for a person working a full time job and Dr. Chuck explains the material in an easy to understand fashion. Well worth the time to take this class. | to understand fashion. Well worth the | Time | to take this class. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | It was hard to some extent (didn't have coding practice for a long time) but absolutely clear video lecture explanations. Plus the book is awesome. Thank you so much. | have coding practice for a long | Time | but absolutely clear video lecture explanations. | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Continuing with part 2 of the specialization, this course was as good and interesting as the first one. Dr. Chuck knows how to lay the fundamentals of progamming in an understandable and easy way to digest the content. The best part is that you get time to practice and resolve by yourself each problem finding your own strengths and weakness and work into improve your skills. | best part is that you get | Time | to practice and resolve by yourself | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | pretty good course for 1st timers, but spending more time on showing how to draw flow charts may be better | for 1st timers, but spending more | Time | on showing how to draw flow | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great course. A Little bit more complicated that the firts one but quite easy anyway for people who wants to learn some programming for first time or if you have to improve your programming skills with a new program language. | to learn some programming for first | Time | or if you have to improve | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I love Dr Chucks way of teaching and making you see how fun programming can be! This is one of the main reasons that keeps me here, even though I'm a junior Engineering student + part time jobat a lab. Totally worth it! | a junior Engineering student + part | Time | jobat a lab. Totally worth it! | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Awesome course, maybe I'm not giving myself enough time to digest one topic before jumping to another as I needed to refer past topic often, open sourced pdf version of book helped a lot. I wanted to know if it is possible to generated dictionary from two seperate list, and it is possible! I was able to zip two list to form a list of tuple and then used dict() method to form a dict... Might not be important but I felt the course will come a full roung when these are covered. | maybe I'm not giving myself enough | Time | to digest one topic before jumping | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | thank u very much i had fun in this course, also (hard times in assignments) thanx again | fun in this course, also (hard | Time | in assignments) thanx again | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I'm very glad I enrolled dr.Chuck courses. All four about Python. They're not too simple, not too hard for the first time. You're need something interesting for the begining. Something that will remind you that learning is interesting. Dr.Chuck courses damn fit for this purpose. Thank you, dr.Chuck, Teaching staff of University of Michigan and Coursera. | not too hard for the first | Time | You're need something interesting for the | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Everything is crystal-clear, dr Chuck is a type of person that is easy to listen to. Time well spent. | that is easy to listen to. | Time | well spent. | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| p6GNi4gDEeW0iQ6RUMSWEQ | THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS COURSE! AMAZING! I learned so much and what a wonderful Professor! Very engaging and warm and really piled on the incredible information- thanks Coursera and Vanderbilt for making this available and thanks Dr. Roden for taking your time to share such wonderfully valuable information! Kindly Shannon | thanks Dr. Roden for taking your | Time | to share such wonderfully valuable information! | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| pD1uvzvKEeWjyxInT4zYJQ | This is an amazingly thoughtful and thought provoking course. The care and time taken to build this course is nothing short of incredible especially as it is offered free of charge to students. This was a wonderful educational experience that has solidified my educational goals of going into the field of epidemiology with focus on persons living with HIV/AIDS. Words cannot express my gratitude for Dr. Meisler and the amazing participants in this course; it is nothing short of a blessing. | thought provoking course. The care and | Time | taken to build this course is | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | Exceptionally great teaching by Professor Martin Odersky, I am right now wondering why his scala.react way of Signals approach is not adopted by any of the major UI platforms ... it makes lot of sense to me having worked in UI layer for a long time and understanding the mess that event driven architecture brings | in UI layer for a long | Time | and understanding the mess that event | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | I would have loved to spend more time on FRP and Futures. Both of those sections could have been expanded and an assignment dealing with Futures would be very welcome. Also, the mish-mash of Futures-related lectures was a bit confusing (despite Erik Meijer's obvious enthusiasm for the subject). Otherwise the course is a great introduction to a number of interesting topics in Scala, which will probably serve as an important stepping-stone for the next parallel programming course. | would have loved to spend more | Time | on FRP and Futures. Both of | Positive | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | At times instructions for problems are really vague. Every method should have comments or be test covered like it was in the first course. For example I had to spend some time, looking through the parser to discover that spaces in calculator expressions are mandatory. Technically it was in the description, but it was not clear at all and I was stuck with the idea that I'm doing something generally wrong so i had to write a whole test(that was kinda ad-hoc and not a good practice at all) to reach that tiny problem. Otherwise the course is really really great. It made me progress a lot in my scala skill, while keeping me interested in the problems and learning some new data structs ect. Keep up the good work! | At | Time | instructions for problems are really vague. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | At times instructions for problems are really vague. Every method should have comments or be test covered like it was in the first course. For example I had to spend some time, looking through the parser to discover that spaces in calculator expressions are mandatory. Technically it was in the description, but it was not clear at all and I was stuck with the idea that I'm doing something generally wrong so i had to write a whole test(that was kinda ad-hoc and not a good practice at all) to reach that tiny problem. Otherwise the course is really really great. It made me progress a lot in my scala skill, while keeping me interested in the problems and learning some new data structs ect. Keep up the good work! | example I had to spend some | Time | looking through the parser to discover | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | a more advanced class but remains friendly to beginners. i can work on 3 courses at the same time without much burden | on 3 courses at the same | Time | without much burden | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | A wonderful course, and a great introduction to both functional programming and Scala language. It's high time that we start paying attention to Functional Programming paradigm, and thanks to Scala we can now use it in the mainstream production grade development. I would highly recommend this course to anyone who is looking for a new (and likely better) way of thinking about programming. | programming and Scala language. It's high | Time | that we start paying attention to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | I expected more. Week 2 on streams in my opinion was a very strong week and well worth time and effort. Week 1, 2 and 3 were pretty weak in my opinion. I don't feel like I've learned much or that the exercises reflected what was being taught in the lectures. For example on week 4 the exercises do nothing with futures even though there's 6 lectures on them. Week 3 spends 3 long lectures how to build a discrete simulation application and exercises are about property checking. Course felt disjointed and not really finished. Would NOT recommend and definitely would not pay 79 USD for. | very strong week and well worth | Time | and effort. Week 1, 2 and | Positive | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | This course sets out to teach from the ground up about various functional programming techniques and their uses. It manages to do just that in a very short time. The ideas are presented in Scala but apply just as well to most other languages. The last week, on functional reactive programming and asynchronous programming in particular can easily be transposed to modern front-end web development. The assignments are also interesting and well balanced. I was familiar with most of the ideas, but this course gave me a better understanding of these. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. | just that in a very short | Time | The ideas are presented in Scala | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | The course was nice but not structured very good, especially week 4. From time to time you have a feeling that this course is more like a compilation of lectures made for other courses with similar topic. Especially confusing are moments when during the lecture author references previous materials you expected to know from lectures you've never heard. That's strange. | very good, especially week 4. From | Time | to time you have a feeling | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | The course was nice but not structured very good, especially week 4. From time to time you have a feeling that this course is more like a compilation of lectures made for other courses with similar topic. Especially confusing are moments when during the lecture author references previous materials you expected to know from lectures you've never heard. That's strange. | especially week 4. From time to | Time | you have a feeling that this | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | Really enjoyed doing the course. Learned a ton of Stuff. Functional programming design is amazing. It's like learning Object Oriented programming (with design patterns) for the first time. | (with design patterns) for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| 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. | of in 2016 (or at any | Time | during this century). Also, the instructors | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| PeZYFz-zEeWB_AoW1KYI4Q | Very good course. Sad that it is at the same time as the Functional Programming Principles in Scala, which is clearly a pre-requisite. | that it is at the same | Time | as the Functional Programming Principles in | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| PGQphxLCEeSD_CIACooXkA | Although I had taken this course and higher levels in the past, there are still many subjects that I do not feel I have mastered them. This course helps me to achieve that goal. Also, it does not mean that this is not a flawless program, but by far is much much much better than the program I had attended in the past. I like to appreciate both instructors for their time and the effort they have put into making these wonderful videos for many students around the world! | to appreciate both instructors for their | Time | and the effort they have put | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| PGQphxLCEeSD_CIACooXkA | Needs some means of feedback. Several times I felt sure that a question was wrong, but there's nothing to be done about it. Additionally, it would be nice if, after completing (and passing) a test, you could see what you did wrong and how the answer should have been determined. | Needs some means of feedback. Several | Time | I felt sure that a question | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| PifzBSv3EeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | I am having a good time learning about new concepts & reading from the resources provided in the courses. | I am having a good | Time | learning about new concepts & reading | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| PJg2NGKXEeWpHwqwM9Gg0w | The lectures are too brief and do not go into details pertinent to the main theses of the course. While it is evident that each of the Roosevelts had a significant impact on their respective time in history, saying that it was a Rooseveltian century is going a bit too far. Nearly all the reforms that they initiated were countered by the end of the 20th century. Wagner-Pyser, Glass-Steagall were gutted by the end of the century and as for the UN we all know how in ineffective that has been at protecting human rights. The only thing that has lasted has been Social Security and that is under attack by a co-opted ultra-conservative Congres | a significant impact on their respective | Time | in history, saying that it was | Positive | 0.92 | 2.0 |
| pkE92hJhEearKQowajWNkQ | This is an excellent intro course. The instructor clearly had a lot of fun preparing videos, and it's contagious. There is a high-level of polish here - even pacing, helpful study guides, solid video production values and active teaching assistant in the forums. I learned a lot in this class, but aside from that it was just a good time :). | that it was just a good | Time | :). | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| pkE92hJhEearKQowajWNkQ | This course is a great introduction to music theory. I have been playing by ear for a long time and i now finally understand some of the things that i did before. I recommend this course to those that one to get a good foundation in music. | playing by ear for a long | Time | and i now finally understand some | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| pkE92hJhEearKQowajWNkQ | I learned so much in so little time. I actually impressed a musician friend of mine when I rattled off and showed him all the chords I learned on the keyboard. I played a 12 bars blues riff on the keyboard, tracked it, and then played a melody and tracked that and made an mp3. I cannot say enough. If I ever have the honor of meeting the professor who taught this course I will tell him I learned more about music in 6 weeks with his superb methods of instruction than I ever did in other courses. I am trying to save up money so I can take an official Berklee online course. This course was awesome! It truly showed why Berklee is in a class by itself. | learned so much in so little | Time | I actually impressed a musician friend | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | I think should be more lessons with less time, like the first modules. But the content is great! | should be more lessons with less | Time | like the first modules. But the | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Thank you very much for the great course! Very useful information not only in the PM area, but also in the management in general. Also very good flexible approach with moving deadlines, as sometimes it is very difficult to find time among busy schedule to listen to the course. | it is very difficult to find | Time | among busy schedule to listen to | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | I enjoyed the overview of project management and the detailed explanations that were immediately helpful in my work. Lots of great information! Many things for me to think about over a long time | to think about over a long | Time | | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Great course in general. Material is not evenly spread in all 4 weeks. 4th week material takes 4 times longer to cover than any of the previous weeks. Last quiz has an error. The right answer is taken as incorrect. | weeks. 4th week material takes 4 | Time | longer to cover than any of | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine this class has been one of my favorite since I've joined Coursera. In the course I've learn so much about project management & everything related to this subject. One of my favorite part of this course is when I can take the quiz as many times as I want in order for me to get right & pass the course. Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine & Coursera Keep up the good work. | can take the quiz as many | Time | as I want in order for | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 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! | a final course worth spending the | Time | effort and money. If there are | Negative | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | I loved, it's easy to follow but at he same time give you important tips to have success projects | to follow but at he same | Time | give you important tips to have | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | i have learn so much from this course and every time it get more interested | much from this course and every | Time | it get more interested | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Instructor seems uninterested or bored. Sometimes he only reads the slides without adding anything else to the content. Others, he goes quickly through a slide without any time to digest the information. Overall, intro level concepts are ok, but specifics about creation or handling of tools is left without deeper explanation | quickly through a slide without any | Time | to digest the information. Overall, intro | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | The basics and overview of project planning and management has been highlighted properly. It helped me get a clearer perspective on how things are being planned and what methodologies are in use at present times. I would love to attend another program on similar lines though I wish next time the cousrse is more rigorous and detailed. Small projects based on the application of some planning software would really add more value to this offereing by the University iof California, Irvine. Thank you Professor Rob Stone | methodologies are in use at present | Time | I would love to attend another | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | The basics and overview of project planning and management has been highlighted properly. It helped me get a clearer perspective on how things are being planned and what methodologies are in use at present times. I would love to attend another program on similar lines though I wish next time the cousrse is more rigorous and detailed. Small projects based on the application of some planning software would really add more value to this offereing by the University iof California, Irvine. Thank you Professor Rob Stone | similar lines though I wish next | Time | the cousrse is more rigorous and | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Basics of Project management briefed in short time. | of Project management briefed in short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| prHAajqwEeWXuQopUhAqaw | Excellent course. Instructors are design this course very efficiently. One has not to review course materials for the second time & before giving "Final examination", if a little attention paid at the first occasion. Thank you very much Coursera & University of Leiden. Looking forward to do more law courses with you. Thanks again. | review course materials for the second | Time | & before giving " Final examination" | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| prHAajqwEeWXuQopUhAqaw | I will give it a 4, but 3.5 would be my review if the 3.5 mark would be available. Strenghts of the course: Solid and elegant presentations, good readings, and the interviews presented with the ICJ judge and the PCA secretary added value. Weakeness and Opportunites: No slides, excessivelly short course in video resources (discounting the interviews, it had about 20-40 minutes of videos, what is clearly insuficient, when benchmarking with other offerings in the MOOC 'arena') and allowing quizzes to be taken on a 2x per hour is not in my opinion adequate. It makes it too easy and fast to finish the course and does not create an incentive to review the materials. Leiden should focus in presenting more specializations in the educational fields that it has reputation - Law, Tax Law, International Studies, in order to capture more value from the current lack of offerings of specializations in that niche markets. Threats: There is a lot of offerings on the MOOC space, with a finite time availability to make choices. By having courses that are very short, there is the risk that people become inclined to chose other offerings that offer more video resources and other materials. Besides my opinion - I am a critic by design, thank you for continuing offering courses in this platform. I wish you luck. Ricardo Oliveira | the MOOC space, with a finite | Time | availability to make choices. By having | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| pSaP4p3ZEeW_wArffOXkOw | This is a very useful and attracting course, and I will use all the skills I learned from it every time I learn some new things. | skills I learned from it every | Time | I learn some new things. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| pSaP4p3ZEeW_wArffOXkOw | Very information and inspiring. An enjoyable course. There are so much materials to digest and memorize that it took me a long time after the course finishes to sink in the materials taught | that it took me a long | Time | after the course finishes to sink | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| pSaP4p3ZEeW_wArffOXkOw | I watched this course for several times. I feel so lucky and happy that I learned so much. | I watched this course for several | Time | I feel so lucky and happy | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| PwuYBQZREeW5gyIACwQVNg | I found this very interesting, covering some topics I did not expect an introduction. I think the pace of the course is about right, but I would have liked more questions. Unfortunately I became very busy during the course and failed to keep up. I look forward to repeating it when I have more time. | repeating it when I have more | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| PwuYBQZREeW5gyIACwQVNg | Very clear and well paced class. I like the early introduction to Julia sets to introduce recent mysteries of in the subject before teaching the classical results. The professor is a very clear speaker and was generous enough with her time to answer some of the forum questions. | and was generous enough with her | Time | to answer some of the forum | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| PwuYBQZREeW5gyIACwQVNg | Wonderful. I have been waiting for this course for some time. It begins somewhat basic, and progresses really fast, to cover some deep topics in complex analysis theory. Also, the instructor, Prof. Petra Bonfert-Taylor, does a very good job at explaining concepts simply, by not being too pedantic (e.g., with the topological preliminaries). Overall, really satisfied and grateful! | waiting for this course for some | Time | It begins somewhat basic, and progresses | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| q3r0bBbMEeafcQ6IJeJ6Vw | The material in this course is well presented, though scarce at times. However it has its share of problems : -little to no interaction from TA's or mentors in the forums -the quizzes are often out of sync with the lectures -the final exam has severe problems with questions (form not content). In more detail, on the final exam, some of the questions don't even contain all the content to answer them. They can request multiple answers but have single question boxes and/or the reverse. | is well presented, though scarce at | Time | However it has its share of | Positive | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | The course is outdated (all figures and discussions are from 2012-2010) so the new reality of the energy industry is completely different. The course is very basic and not that informative. And on top of that the scientific explanations are a lot of times quite weak (in particular the thermodynamics were quite terrible). Not what I expected from faculty at a Tier 1 research university. | scientific explanations are a lot of | Time | quite weak (in particular the thermodynamics | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Good introductory course on energy. The data shown is 3 years old (2012-2013) but the trend analysis presented holds good for a long time. Professor is very practical minded. I gave it a 4 star because more coverage required on Nuclear Power. | presented holds good for a long | Time | Professor is very practical minded. I | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Under the time constraint, its a good summary! | Under the | Time | constraint, its a good summary! | Positive | 0.89 | 4.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Excellent course presented by Dr. Shelton, who provided the facts and the energy situation on 2013. For me was very informative and I am hoping that he can have the time and opportunity to present an updated course with the current energy market situation. | hoping that he can have the | Time | and opportunity to present an updated | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Great class. At times I was lost, when he talked about alternative | Great class. At | Time | I was lost, when he talked | Positive | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| 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. | not going to disenroll at this | Time | but I have lost interest without | Negative | 0.93 | 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. | hand, unfortunately it's not worth one's | Time | as it didn't deliver very good | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I was scepticale at first but Raj explained all sides to his ideas so well that I had to keep watching. Every time I thought of important questions, he'd explain it 1 minute later. The only concern for me personaly was that he choose creative wordings over clarity & simplicity. I also aticipated better strategies and explainations to sin #5 for toxic people, psych pain, accountability but besides this everything else was beyond expectations. | I had to keep watching. Every | Time | I thought of important questions, he'd | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Raj, is super pleasant it was so nice to spend some time in his happiness univers. He spot our bad habits and recommend simple change of mindset to get back on track to happiness path. | was so nice to spend some | Time | in his happiness univers. He spot | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I will recommend everyone to spend some quality time with Dr. Raj to discover happiness inside you. | recommend everyone to spend some quality | Time | with Dr. Raj to discover happiness | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The course was excellent. My regret was that I didn't have sufficient time to devote to it - tax time and extra courses perhaps weren't the best idea. I'm a little down-hearted not being able to complete it, but realize I learned a lot, have started to meditate, and did manage to read 3 of the optional books suggested by Dr.Raj. I have noted others to read in the months ahead, including (most definitely) his own new book. Best wishes and thank you to everyone who worked so hard putting this course together. Barbara Phillips-Conroy | was that I didn't have sufficient | Time | to devote to it - tax | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The course was excellent. My regret was that I didn't have sufficient time to devote to it - tax time and extra courses perhaps weren't the best idea. I'm a little down-hearted not being able to complete it, but realize I learned a lot, have started to meditate, and did manage to read 3 of the optional books suggested by Dr.Raj. I have noted others to read in the months ahead, including (most definitely) his own new book. Best wishes and thank you to everyone who worked so hard putting this course together. Barbara Phillips-Conroy | to devote to it - tax | Time | and extra courses perhaps weren't the | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The class was absolutely Wonderful, however I don't have the time to go at a student's pace (work , hom, life in general). I was trying to go back and finish week 6 video #4 but was unable to open the course! I want to llearn I wasn't aware there was a time limit to learn happiness. :( | Wonderful, however I don't have the | Time | to go at a student's pace | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The class was absolutely Wonderful, however I don't have the time to go at a student's pace (work , hom, life in general). I was trying to go back and finish week 6 video #4 but was unable to open the course! I want to llearn I wasn't aware there was a time limit to learn happiness. :( | I wasn't aware there was a | Time | limit to learn happiness. :( | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Great course, worth my time, learned so much and feel better than ever... | Great course, worth my | Time | learned so much and feel better | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I really enjoyed this course! Dr. Raghunathan has a lot of energy and is very engaging in the videos for each module. The information is clear and easy to understand, yet at the same time, has led to serious improvements in my life. Not only that, the assignments in this class get each of us to reach out and connect with people in our communities in an organic and comfortable manner. Also, there are a lot of very good book recommendations throughout the course and I highly recommend checking some of them out!! I've already recommended this course to friends in my "real life", and I hope that this review will sway someone to enroll. Stay well! | to understand, yet at the same | Time | has led to serious improvements in | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am definitely enjoying Professor Raj, a fellow Texan :-) . I enjoy the guest Skype segments and the book suggestions. I like the Budda quote and the cartoons. Suggestions for improvement.... Make fewer, but longer videos. In my opinion, I lose learning time by watching so many short videos, because each video has the opening animation and closing credits. Also, there really is no need to have someone else give the assignment, she is beautiful and pleasant, but it's distracting and her audio is different than yours, so when wearing ear buds, she sometimes blows my ears up, she's so loud. Would be interested in seeing what else Professor Raj teaches on line. | In my opinion, I lose learning | Time | by watching so many short videos, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | This is probably my fourth course at Coursera. And the first one I could complete properly. I have had to leave the rest because of the time and effort they asked for, and for a working professional, it's just that much harder to give in so many hours! With this course, I feel at ease watching the lectures and felt the tension melt away rather than having an add on pressure. The best part is that I finished this course within 4 weeks rather than the stipulated 6 weeks(which shows how good Dr. Raj is, kudos to him!) The only thing I felt missing was a sense of feedback from the professors, like in a real classroom. When people indulge themselves in courses involving such vigour and enthusiasm, they expect to find a feedback from the professor as well. Maybe a sense of real time involvement. But then again, I'll congratulate Dr. Raj and the team at ISB for making such a brilliant course. I have already made many of my friends sign up for this! Cheers. | leave the rest because of the | Time | and effort they asked for, and | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | This is probably my fourth course at Coursera. And the first one I could complete properly. I have had to leave the rest because of the time and effort they asked for, and for a working professional, it's just that much harder to give in so many hours! With this course, I feel at ease watching the lectures and felt the tension melt away rather than having an add on pressure. The best part is that I finished this course within 4 weeks rather than the stipulated 6 weeks(which shows how good Dr. Raj is, kudos to him!) The only thing I felt missing was a sense of feedback from the professors, like in a real classroom. When people indulge themselves in courses involving such vigour and enthusiasm, they expect to find a feedback from the professor as well. Maybe a sense of real time involvement. But then again, I'll congratulate Dr. Raj and the team at ISB for making such a brilliant course. I have already made many of my friends sign up for this! Cheers. | well. Maybe a sense of real | Time | involvement. But then again, I'll congratulate | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The course modules are too long and at times what the speaker wants to share gets confusing | modules are too long and at | Time | what the speaker wants to share | Positive | 0.62 | 1.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A very good course. My only suggestions would be to extend the course for a week or even two. The time and amount of work needed to complete the last week's assignments were inconsistent with the other weeks. To have done my best with the final quiz and assignment, I should have spent a significant amount of time reviewing material from previous weeks. | a week or even two. The | Time | and amount of work needed to | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A very good course. My only suggestions would be to extend the course for a week or even two. The time and amount of work needed to complete the last week's assignments were inconsistent with the other weeks. To have done my best with the final quiz and assignment, I should have spent a significant amount of time reviewing material from previous weeks. | have spent a significant amount of | Time | reviewing material from previous weeks. | Negative | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | CAUTION ! Although it states that | Time | commitment is 2-3 hours a week, | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | re-watch a lecture, you'll need more | Time | Plus on top of that, there | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | quizzes and assignments. (You can save | Time | by not submitting assignments via the | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Excellent course. Worthy to do it many times. | course. Worthy to do it many | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | the contents of the course were very good. It is essential material that everyone should learn about as early as possible in their life. It should be essential learning in each school. All the material is based on scientific facts. there are, however, reasons why I did not rate this course with 5 points. The amount of material takes a lifetime to digest and adopt. To cram this into a few weeks was not the appropriate way to teach it. there were way too many videos one was supposed to watch within a single week. Sometimes even the summary videos for a single week took 20 minutes. That is just not right. I was so busy memorizing the material that I did not find the time to adopt it in my daily life. what a pity. it will take me many months to really digest the material | that I did not find the | Time | to adopt it in my daily | Negative | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I've taken about 70 MOOCs across multiple platforms. Of those 70, I've completed about 12. Of those 12, about 4 were good. This is one of those four. Sometimes the videos were a little long, but the work was inspired and the science behind the content was great. I did every assignment (rare for a MOOCer, as you probably know). This was totally worth my time. I hope you find it to be worth yours. Enjoy! | know). This was totally worth my | Time | I hope you find it to | Negative | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Simply excelente, It helped me to understand too many things that have been happening to me for a long time and teach me how to overcome my bad habits THANKS A LOT!!! | happening to me for a long | Time | and teach me how to overcome | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Thank you for tour time and effort. The course gave me ideas for a new perspetive in my life. | Thank you for tour | Time | and effort. The course gave me | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | The program was well put together. The class was what I call "bottom heavy" because the last part of the class had a lot of really good and relate-able information. I found my self replaying classes 2 -3 time to get the full value of what was being presented. I found myself saying "wow" a lot. Could someone tell the lady that does the 6 week class to turn off her clock when on line. I dropped that class, the coo-coo was distracting | my self replaying classes 2 -3 | Time | to get the full value of | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A life of Happiness and Fulfilment has been a real great experience, a time I could offer myself to explore and dig deep into happiness. I think Prof. Raj plays a huge role in motivating participants to move forward, even the more suspicious about the value of compassion, mindfulness, loving care. Prof. Raj teaches with passion and always finding balance between being and acting professional but I am so grateful Prof Raj knows he can dance, and tell us jokes, be super friendly and yet be his perfect "self". Thank you prof. Raj, I enjoyed your classes and the guests you brought to us. Alohaf! | been a real great experience, a | Time | I could offer myself to explore | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | This is one of the finest course I have taken on Coursera. I know what "Happiness" is and how to be happy all the time. I loved the 'Mindfulness" videos, they were simply amazing | how to be happy all the | Time | I loved the 'Mindfulness" videos, they | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | What a wonderful class! For six weeks I've devoted more time to focusing on the more important things in life –– the things that actually matter, versus letting the trivial get me down like it used to. I feel absolutely prepared for a happier future! This class has left me with a greatly expanded tool set to further explore the value that being happy and fulfilled can add (and have added!) to my life. | For six weeks I've devoted more | Time | to focusing on the more important | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Exceptional instructor. Arguments based in sound science. Presentation a bit hokey at times, but all in good fun. | science. Presentation a bit hokey at | Time | but all in good fun. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| QgmoVdT2EeSlhSIACx2EBw | This is the third or fourth time I've reviewed this course but it still keeps asking me to | This is the third or fourth | Time | I've reviewed this course but it | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| QgmoVdT2EeSlhSIACx2EBw | covers a lot of ground in short time | a lot of ground in short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| QKGzLQoYEeWKzSIAC7Uk8A | This course provides a great introduction into conflict management. The assignments really allowed me to reflect on times when I was both successful in dealing with a conflict and when I failed. The only drawback is that the concepts are presented rather linearly. | really allowed me to reflect on | Time | when I was both successful in | Positive | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The course is very well structured and everything is well explained. You learn a lot, but for a person with poor previous knowledge about database systems it requires more time dedication than the the 4-6 hours it says. | about database systems it requires more | Time | dedication than the the 4-6 hours | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Nice introductory course for database management. Assignments are challenging enough for beginners like me but I like that. If I'm already 'investing' my time into something I expect to learn something in return. This course gave me that kind of reciprocity. Course would benefit from radically different approach to video-lessons. Reading from power-point slides which are written in the same manner, have identical structure tends to become tedious after a while. Professor seems nice and knowledgeable but a bit more relaxed and/or engaging approach would be beneficial to many. Oh, and peer-reviewed grading, wherever possible, should be replaced with an auto-grader. That's not a critique, though. Not quite sure if it's even possible with this kind of material. | that. If I'm already 'investing' my | Time | into something I expect to learn | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The specialization is great, and the course breadth and topics described in each is equally good. For this course, however, I felt like I could have covered what was taught by myself with a book, i.e. I didn't feel like it was class room level engaging with the explanations. I realized this is a one way MOOC, but I've taken courses off and on since they came out, and some others felt more interactive. This was more of here's a slide, I will read what's on the slide and explain some topics. The assignments were not bad, but definitely took more time than stated (just keep that in mind). The other thing that would help immensely is having TAs in the course. It's possible that they may get some later, but I've felt I learned/got feedback a lot more in courses with TAs. That said, this is an excellent introduction to databases course, and there's not many of them out there. If I had to go it again, I would, and I also paid for getting the cert - if anything for career advancement and having it on your LinkedIn profile as a starter DB course. | not bad, but definitely took more | Time | than stated (just keep that in | Positive | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I really enjoyed this course, the course instructor has a nice tonality and the presentation are most of the time well structured. The database installation should be covered in more detail and i had to buy the book in order to understand everything. Over | the presentation are most of the | Time | well structured. The database installation should | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | I could not finish because videos were stuttered - even with bigger bandwidth - and as a consequence I could not finish the course and the exercises in my limited free time (therefore, only 2 stars). Is the problem solved now - cause I d like to resume the course again. If that's more successful now I would start the next parts of the specialization. Thank you for an answer! | the exercises in my limited free | Time | (therefore, only 2 stars). Is the | Negative | 0.62 | 2.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Pros: The course content covers a lot of relevant topics on Database Management. Things like Basic SQL queries, Database Normalization, Conceptual and Logical databases, and making ER diagrams are covered in the course. Cons: Prof Mannino is a bit robotic in his reading out of long sentences and the constant pace of talking. There is tons of repetition of sentences and words mere seconds after they were just spoken. The lectures seem to be a collection of bullet points. The assignments and the peer review structure is really a low point. There's no specific grading rubric - so points allocation is random and based on your peer's assessment. I had many instances where my right answers were marked as wrong. There is nothing you can do to correct it. Moreover, the questions are iterative and thus the same apparent error carries on and you get multiple wrong scores. Assignments need to be submitted in documents. Separate documents for each question !! At times, even a one-line answer needs to be in a separate document. Pictures of database diagrams need to be pasted in said documents. It was a bit frustrating to take screenshots all the time. Especially when you make a small correction, and have to take screenshots AGAIN, then paste it AGAIN, and upload AGAIN !! Summary: Take the course for it's content, and use the assignments as good practice. Don't take the grading seriously. Also, focus on the content rather than the delivery by the professor, and you will still be able to get some value out of the course (and the specialization by extension) | for each question ! ! At | Time | even a one-line answer needs to | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Pros: The course content covers a lot of relevant topics on Database Management. Things like Basic SQL queries, Database Normalization, Conceptual and Logical databases, and making ER diagrams are covered in the course. Cons: Prof Mannino is a bit robotic in his reading out of long sentences and the constant pace of talking. There is tons of repetition of sentences and words mere seconds after they were just spoken. The lectures seem to be a collection of bullet points. The assignments and the peer review structure is really a low point. There's no specific grading rubric - so points allocation is random and based on your peer's assessment. I had many instances where my right answers were marked as wrong. There is nothing you can do to correct it. Moreover, the questions are iterative and thus the same apparent error carries on and you get multiple wrong scores. Assignments need to be submitted in documents. Separate documents for each question !! At times, even a one-line answer needs to be in a separate document. Pictures of database diagrams need to be pasted in said documents. It was a bit frustrating to take screenshots all the time. Especially when you make a small correction, and have to take screenshots AGAIN, then paste it AGAIN, and upload AGAIN !! Summary: Take the course for it's content, and use the assignments as good practice. Don't take the grading seriously. Also, focus on the content rather than the delivery by the professor, and you will still be able to get some value out of the course (and the specialization by extension) | frustrating to take screenshots all the | Time | Especially when you make a small | Positive | 0.71 | 3.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Professor Michael Mannino presents a very well prepared course that achieves optimal results in a limited time. Given my experience, it was a bit basic for me. Nevertheless, it filled in the gaps in my knowledge and gave me confidence to take it forward. | achieves optimal results in a limited | Time | Given my experience, it was a | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | A good introductory course. I would recommend allowing for extra time to get the database software up and functioning so that you aren't crammed for time trying to get it configured and do the assignment in week 2. | I would recommend allowing for extra | Time | to get the database software up | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | A good introductory course. I would recommend allowing for extra time to get the database software up and functioning so that you aren't crammed for time trying to get it configured and do the assignment in week 2. | so that you aren't crammed for | Time | trying to get it configured and | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Severe lack of support (zero) from the professor or TAs. Some wrong solutions were provided for assigments but were never addressed or acknowledged that it will be fixed. Some assignment files are not Mac friendly or is just not viewable by all students (I can't tell). Materials are quite good but grading is subject to broad interpretations and there is no human to provide guidance on what are the best practices. To think that I paid for the specialisation in order to take the graded assignment AND I have to do the grading BUT I do not receive support? This is ridiculous. I will have to think three times before I pay for a Coursera course in the future. Never again. I will not recommend this to others. | I will have to think three | Time | before I pay for a Coursera | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| 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. | like the instructor takes as much | Time | asking and answering an often contrived | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The course was very well presented and was easy to follow. my only problem is that I struggled a little and as much as I was trying to follow and read the recommended reading material, I found that there was not enough time due to the volume of assignments per week. Maybe if the assignments were reduced or we have them every 2 weeks?! | found that there was not enough | Time | due to the volume of assignments | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| qLFYrxnoEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Excellent course! It was my 1st experience with Coursera and I didn't expect that online learning can be so stimulating and exciting. The biggest advantage of this course is its very practical approach and fact that each week there is assignment. The only disadvantage here is the fact that this course has been more time-consuming that I initially expected it to be hence I had to spend more time on it than estimated 3-6 hours a week. For full-time working person it was not easy to keep up with deadlines, especially the weeks with 2 assignments per week. Nevertheless - truly intensive and interestingly presented. I strongly recommend:) | hence I had to spend more | Time | on it than estimated 3-6 hours | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| QO7QgCzfEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Good hands on course. The self built amplifier circuit feels like a hack but works around the voltage level issues adequately without the mezzanine board which was not available at the time the course was prepared. | which was not available at the | Time | the course was prepared. | Positive | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| QO7QgCzfEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Headed downhill. Lessons are starting to feel like not enough time was put into preperation... or like this course was assigned as a project to some students so the professor could make a dollar (like textbooks). One of the instructors even said at one point they didn't have enough time. What does that even mean in an online course. You could be fixing it right now and improving the course. This whole thing is being handled like a college course and that is crazy. On-line courses can undergo continual improvement. The college course paradigm is dying because we can do it better now. Fail. | starting to feel like not enough | Time | was put into preperation. . . | Negative | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| QO7QgCzfEeWv_w7cMMH1Uw | Headed downhill. Lessons are starting to feel like not enough time was put into preperation... or like this course was assigned as a project to some students so the professor could make a dollar (like textbooks). One of the instructors even said at one point they didn't have enough time. What does that even mean in an online course. You could be fixing it right now and improving the course. This whole thing is being handled like a college course and that is crazy. On-line courses can undergo continual improvement. The college course paradigm is dying because we can do it better now. Fail. | one point they didn't have enough | Time | What does that even mean in | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| qogqSFgBEeWBNwpVGuknww | Very concise, well presented course. This was my second time taking it as a refresher. Prof. Caffo does a great job presenting the materials. However, prepare to be challenged. | presented course. This was my second | Time | taking it as a refresher. Prof. | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There needs to be more help available, at least for paying students, to answer questions and clear misunderstanding. The quizzes are taking too much time. | The quizzes are taking too much | Time | | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I will start with you do learn a lot from the videos (and the stuff you learn is very valuable), it's the absence of staff or professor involvement that is a problem and why I am not giving 5 stars. Outside of quizzes which are graded by computers, your "practice" assignments (which aren't practice because you can't check your answers before a test, super awesome when you can't really ask for help), final project and forum questions are graded or answered by other students. If you have any confusion, either it will go unresolved or be worsened by potentially wrong answers from other students which I saw happen many, many times. Maybe I am expecting too much from an online learning platform? In all, I feel like while I did learn, I perhaps learned some wrong practices too. So while the videos are great, the actual teacher involvement is poor. Coursera - I am not sure how you and the university work together, but is it totally strange to desire some input from your professor? | which I saw happen many, many | Time | Maybe I am expecting too much | Negative | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Absolutely outstanding course. It stretched me - late nights grappling with the data, learning Tableau, recording a blooper-free presentation. So many takes! But this course was not just about Tableau; it was about clarifying goals, planning before diving into the data, putting yourself in the shoes of the client and good presentation principles. Great practical exercise at the end - make sure you put aside plenty of time for this. | sure you put aside plenty of | Time | for this. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have being using Tableau for the last 5 months. Though I could consider myself strong in visualization, it is clear after taking the first two weeks of this course that I was utterly poor in analysis. Thank you for this powerful course. Whether you are familiar with Tableau or not, this is a course worthy all your time. | is a course worthy all your | Time | | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Useful Tableau tips and visualization recommendations. Instructor videos are accelerated most of the time so the speech sounds unnatural and sometimes difficult to understand. | videos are accelerated most of the | Time | so the speech sounds unnatural and | Negative | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Really liked the course. Very well designed and carried away. The only thing I wasn't too happy was the final project as the data was not easy to understand. As a beginner when we have to focus more on Tableau related features, I ended up spending more time understanding the data which didn't really help me. Otherwise, it was a good course. Surely, it put me on a fast track for Tableau. | features, I ended up spending more | Time | understanding the data which didn't really | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| qoYa6HE8EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | Great course. Thanks a lot for your time. | course. Thanks a lot for your | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| QPsZPf2gEeSvCSIAC12B5Q | Nice course!Very elaborate and well detailed.Except for some videos that get stuck for some time making the lesson longer,it was a nice course.I also thank you for giving me this opportunity to get a certificate from Amory University which will help me as an EMT-I. Thank You. | videos that get stuck for some | Time | making the lesson longer, it was | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| QPsZPf2gEeSvCSIAC12B5Q | Great course on Ebola. Very engaging and intense at times. Thorough and interesting. | Ebola. Very engaging and intense at | Time | Thorough and interesting. | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | I enjoyed the course. My background is mathematics, but not specifically statistics, though I do have a basic understanding of elementary frequentist statistics. My goal was to understand the fundamentals and uses of Bayesian statistics, having attempted that via a couple of textbooks without much success; this time, I got it! I do have some reservations about the course. Herbie Lee spent a huge amount of time deriving formulas and methods - a few gaps (either hand waving or 'leave it to the student to finish') would have been helpful, I think. This would leave more time for examples and applications. But the course was well worth my time and effort. | of textbooks without much success; this | Time | I got it! I do have | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | I enjoyed the course. My background is mathematics, but not specifically statistics, though I do have a basic understanding of elementary frequentist statistics. My goal was to understand the fundamentals and uses of Bayesian statistics, having attempted that via a couple of textbooks without much success; this time, I got it! I do have some reservations about the course. Herbie Lee spent a huge amount of time deriving formulas and methods - a few gaps (either hand waving or 'leave it to the student to finish') would have been helpful, I think. This would leave more time for examples and applications. But the course was well worth my time and effort. | Lee spent a huge amount of | Time | deriving formulas and methods - a | Negative | 0.85 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | I enjoyed the course. My background is mathematics, but not specifically statistics, though I do have a basic understanding of elementary frequentist statistics. My goal was to understand the fundamentals and uses of Bayesian statistics, having attempted that via a couple of textbooks without much success; this time, I got it! I do have some reservations about the course. Herbie Lee spent a huge amount of time deriving formulas and methods - a few gaps (either hand waving or 'leave it to the student to finish') would have been helpful, I think. This would leave more time for examples and applications. But the course was well worth my time and effort. | I think. This would leave more | Time | for examples and applications. But the | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | I enjoyed the course. My background is mathematics, but not specifically statistics, though I do have a basic understanding of elementary frequentist statistics. My goal was to understand the fundamentals and uses of Bayesian statistics, having attempted that via a couple of textbooks without much success; this time, I got it! I do have some reservations about the course. Herbie Lee spent a huge amount of time deriving formulas and methods - a few gaps (either hand waving or 'leave it to the student to finish') would have been helpful, I think. This would leave more time for examples and applications. But the course was well worth my time and effort. | the course was well worth my | Time | and effort. | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| Qqmr3fBKEeWLaBLI8fdMlw | There are several things in the course that were able to clear up my understanding. The course instructor responds to more questions than I would have expected as well. The course uses a lot of mathematical notation and it helps to take some time with it but once you get the idea of conjugate priors down you can quickly employ them in your own problems. The course covers conjugate priors for several different likelihoods including the normal distribution and the binomial distribution. Although the derivation of the conjugate priors looks daunting as it is written down, the usage of the priors make Bayesian statistics much easier. This course uses R and Excel but is not a course in either. Most of the computations that are performed for the quizzes are pretty simple and require little skill in R. I am glad that I have taken the course and would take another if provided by this instructor. I plan to reference the materials provided in the future whenever I need a refresher. | and it helps to take some | Time | with it but once you get | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | This course is almost outstanding. Half of the presentations are top-notch reviews of the relevant highlights of their subject matter. Half of the rest are logical, but somewhat perfunctory reviews of similar sets of highlights, and finally, the other quarter are sadly hampered by having no visible organization, with delivery that could only have been improved by rehearsing the narrations a couple of times before the lecture was videotaped. I give most praise to presenters Connelly, Pope, Eibye-Jacobsen, Sørensen, Cuny, and Dahl. These lectures alone make the course eminently worthwhile. | rehearsing the narrations a couple of | Time | before the lecture was videotaped. I | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | a great Copenhagen University course that takes you on a journey in time and space . | takes you on a journey in | Time | and space . | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | Amazing course - very deep and at the same time very general picture of our big history. Thank you very much for this great course | very deep and at the same | Time | very general picture of our big | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| 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. | It would be much better next | Time | if you allow each speaker give | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| 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. | be constructive giving back somehow the | Time | and effort spent by you guys | Negative | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| QRDjcWLVEeWFkQ7sUCFGVQ | I'm taking this course for the second time. Most of the the topics covered are fascinating and well presented | taking this course for the second | Time | Most of the the topics covered | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| QuMnnbfJEeSsbCIAC0gVBg | Fun and engaging course with a lot of material I would have otherwise not looked into. I made so many friends and have a deeper appreciation for Tolkien and LOTRO than I did before this course! I highly recommend this to anyone looking to take a course that can truly be informative and fun at the same time. | informative and fun at the same | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| QuMnnbfJEeSsbCIAC0gVBg | This was just a life-changing perspective-changing course for me. I have always loved Tolkien and have a background in literature and theatre. However I had always thought of LOTR as genre fiction and not "serious" literature. Studying it in the context of English Romantic quest narratives and poems changed my perspective. Beyond that, the world of online gaming was opened to me. I had viewed games from a distance with fascination but they missed my generation and so I had never dived in. As a newbie gamer over 60, it WAS a steep learning curve but I loved the challenge and the community I met in the game. Such a lively and nice bunch of people. I don't know what I did with my time before. | know what I did with my | Time | before. | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| qVetW596EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | This course is very valuable and relevant (in current time). The course very elegantly brings design thinking, lean startup and Agile methodology together in one practice. | very valuable and relevant (in current | Time | The course very elegantly brings design | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| qVetW596EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | I have learned alot from this course even though I have no experience using it at all. But now I am starting to use it and I go over at it all the time. Thanks Coursera! | go over at it all the | Time | Thanks Coursera! | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| qVetW596EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Having successfully completed 'Getting Started: Agile Meets Design Thinking' I found this module partially confusing. It is also based on Alex Cowans' venture design process but this time on each step you do things that differ from what was taught in the previous course. Things seem to be complementary but you should not expect to go through a structured process over all courses. They are all based on the same process but shed light on different aspects. I also have the imporession that the didactics of this second course still coudl be improved a lot. Quizzes are currently reworked and bugs fixed and the team is very responsive. It still was a good learning experience and doing Design sprints is a great approach. From the review of assignments I can say that a few students seem to adapt better to the structure of the course that I did. But most seemed to be equally if not more confused. Doing reviews wasn't fun because formally most students got enough points but content-wise I perceived it as rather messy assignments to review. :/ | Cowans' venture design process but this | Time | on each step you do things | Negative | 0.78 | 3.0 |
| qVetW596EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | I only did week one of the course and quit for the following reasons: Presentation of the content is too fast and provides little information among lots of noise. Most of what's said is generic keywords assembled in sentences that don't make much sense, or implies "common sense" evidences barely illustrated with vague figures and no sources to support them. It makes everything hard to follow for beginners and unconvincing for more advanced students. On top of that, I feel offended by the mysogynist examples and the underlying contradictory assumptions that designers outside of agile are basically incompetent while saying at the same time that they will just use methods they already know anyway. | incompetent while saying at the same | Time | that they will just use methods | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| qXxuFBUnEeWhTg59fTWfpQ | Excellent return on the investment of my time and exceeded my expectations. I wish to thank the academic staff, postdoctoral researchers and postgraduate students from the School of Psychology and Business School who contributed to this investigative and inspiring course. | return on the investment of my | Time | and exceeded my expectations. I wish | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| qXxuFBUnEeWhTg59fTWfpQ | The course is interesting and the self-reflection activies are great opportunies to learn about yourself. However, the course is very short. Each week takes less than 1 hour to watch and it feels like an introduction of an introduction. If you love to learn a lot about something, I don't think this course is for you. However, if you want to take time to learn about yourself, it's great. | However, if you want to take | Time | to learn about yourself, it's great. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Qzq_RhPlEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | very well course for the new student first time learning to write the code and the teacher was excellent in the class. | course for the new student first | Time | learning to write the code and | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | I think the level was a bit on the low side and the time i had to spend on each week was far less compared with the first module. Videos maintain high standard. | on the low side and the | Time | i had to spend on each | Negative | 0.71 | 3.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | There were the occasional moments when I had a hard time clearly understanding what the lecturer meant. Otherwise pretty good. | moments when I had a hard | Time | clearly understanding what the lecturer meant. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Good information and very heavy if you are working a full time job and are not generally involved in strategy planning. I strongly suggest that you use time to listen and re-listen to the presentation. | if you are working a full | Time | job and are not generally involved | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | Good information and very heavy if you are working a full time job and are not generally involved in strategy planning. I strongly suggest that you use time to listen and re-listen to the presentation. | I strongly suggest that you use | Time | to listen and re-listen to the | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | I give this course a 5-star review. The learning strikes a perfect balance between challenging one's limits and being relaxed and enjoyable. I feel relaxed in the course, but at the same time I feel like it's always 1% beyond my reach, which really pushes me to work harder! It stretches my own limitations and encourages me to excel, without being too much to handle. I think that this course belongs amongst the top elite courses offered by Coursera. Bravo! | the course, but at the same | Time | I feel like it's always 1% | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | At times a direct contrast the the precursor class. Assignments too easy. Lectures okay but syllabus lacked structure. Too easy. Wasted time. | At | Time | a direct contrast the the precursor | Positive | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| r0e9gyUAEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | At times a direct contrast the the precursor class. Assignments too easy. Lectures okay but syllabus lacked structure. Too easy. Wasted time. | syllabus lacked structure. Too easy. Wasted | Time | | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | Really Good Course , Problems are of good quality , the content is time saving and easy to understand. | good quality , the content is | Time | saving and easy to understand. | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | This review is based on the last three courses that I have undertaken in the Data Structure and Algorithms Specialization. While running our tests the output does provide the time and memory used for running our algorithms. I think it would also be instructive to see the running time of the best implementation in the particular language and the best time achieved ever by a student in such a course. It would provide us with an additional motivation to think about better and efficient implementations. Note: I do understand that running times might not always be an exact reflection of the actual time the algorithm takes. | tests the output does provide the | Time | and memory used for running our | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | This review is based on the last three courses that I have undertaken in the Data Structure and Algorithms Specialization. While running our tests the output does provide the time and memory used for running our algorithms. I think it would also be instructive to see the running time of the best implementation in the particular language and the best time achieved ever by a student in such a course. It would provide us with an additional motivation to think about better and efficient implementations. Note: I do understand that running times might not always be an exact reflection of the actual time the algorithm takes. | be instructive to see the running | Time | of the best implementation in the | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | This review is based on the last three courses that I have undertaken in the Data Structure and Algorithms Specialization. While running our tests the output does provide the time and memory used for running our algorithms. I think it would also be instructive to see the running time of the best implementation in the particular language and the best time achieved ever by a student in such a course. It would provide us with an additional motivation to think about better and efficient implementations. Note: I do understand that running times might not always be an exact reflection of the actual time the algorithm takes. | the particular language and the best | Time | achieved ever by a student in | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | This review is based on the last three courses that I have undertaken in the Data Structure and Algorithms Specialization. While running our tests the output does provide the time and memory used for running our algorithms. I think it would also be instructive to see the running time of the best implementation in the particular language and the best time achieved ever by a student in such a course. It would provide us with an additional motivation to think about better and efficient implementations. Note: I do understand that running times might not always be an exact reflection of the actual time the algorithm takes. | Note: I do understand that running | Time | might not always be an exact | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | This review is based on the last three courses that I have undertaken in the Data Structure and Algorithms Specialization. While running our tests the output does provide the time and memory used for running our algorithms. I think it would also be instructive to see the running time of the best implementation in the particular language and the best time achieved ever by a student in such a course. It would provide us with an additional motivation to think about better and efficient implementations. Note: I do understand that running times might not always be an exact reflection of the actual time the algorithm takes. | an exact reflection of the actual | Time | the algorithm takes. | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | I must say I feel disappointed especially when the whole Data Structures and Algorithms series take this course as the selling point ( "you'll learn how to compute the fastest route between New York and Mountain View thousands of times faster than classic algorithms and close to those used in Google Maps", blablabla), but it turns out to be the least challenging course with only elementary introduction to the big topic. Perhaps the preparing time for this course is too short? I still miss the teaching style and assignment design of the first course of the series though. It would seem to be unwise to pay for the following courses if this continues on. (FYI I was the among the first ones who take this series, and I have got 100% grade for each course ever since then.) | York and Mountain View thousands of | Time | faster than classic algorithms and close | Positive | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | I must say I feel disappointed especially when the whole Data Structures and Algorithms series take this course as the selling point ( "you'll learn how to compute the fastest route between New York and Mountain View thousands of times faster than classic algorithms and close to those used in Google Maps", blablabla), but it turns out to be the least challenging course with only elementary introduction to the big topic. Perhaps the preparing time for this course is too short? I still miss the teaching style and assignment design of the first course of the series though. It would seem to be unwise to pay for the following courses if this continues on. (FYI I was the among the first ones who take this series, and I have got 100% grade for each course ever since then.) | the big topic. Perhaps the preparing | Time | for this course is too short? | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | The course is too shallow - amount of topics discusses is quite small. Practice tasks are boring - implement pseudocode given in lectures. No quizzes. In particular you can see that it is a bad course, if you compare it to the previous 2 courses in the specialization. I'm agree with other people posting in forums about that. Wasted time, could spend that month more productively. Not going to continue passing other future courses. | posting in forums about that. Wasted | Time | could spend that month more productively. | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| R1xPlXlzEeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | Course was to easy and nothing new in it not as the description that it has algorithms 100000 times faster than google. | description that it has algorithms 100000 | Time | faster than google. | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | Course provides practical understanding for cryptographic primitives without delving too deeply into the maths. I found the accompanying book (optional) to be of great value in enhancing the depth of material. Would have been helpful to spend a bit more time on SSL/TLS to solidify the knowledge. | helpful to spend a bit more | Time | on SSL/TLS to solidify the knowledge. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | Nice course! The private-key schemes part was especially well structured. I would consider plus one or two weeks to have more time for public-key part too. This way the practical implications of public key cryptography, like the lecture on SSL, could be more detailed as well. | or two weeks to have more | Time | for public-key part too. This way | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | This course was enjoyable and challenging. Early lessons cover historical ciphers, along with some fun programming challenges to attack them. Later lessons dive into modern cryptography. This is more challenging and you will need to study some number theory if you have not done so previously. I ended up buying Prof Katz' book and also Concrete Mathematics to fully get my head around the subject matter. The treatment is not superficial. This is where I dropped one star from the review - I thought that the course could have done a better job of covering the theory in this space, or at least pointing to sources to study it, or mentioning it as a pre-requisite. I also thought that the course could have done a better job of describing how all the pieces come together - the discussion is there, but it is light and somewhat assumed you will get it. The only thorough discussion is specifically for SSL / TLS late in the lecture series. Overall, a good and challenging course. This is not an easy MOOC - so only take it if you are interested in a challenge and don't mind extra study time. | challenge and don't mind extra study | Time | | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| r32oHRuLEeWxXBLj8jbgsw | I am very fond of the way the course material was presented. I found the definitions and proofs to be rigorous and intuitive at the same time, which is of great importance when learning such material. The accompanying textbook is great, too. Although I was already familiar with parts of the material, I thoroughly enjoyed the course. | rigorous and intuitive at the same | Time | which is of great importance when | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | Very good introduction course for motion planning. Could be better if there is more interactions with the TAs. Also the matlab assignments have some minor mistakes which takes time to figure it out. | have some minor mistakes which takes | Time | to figure it out. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The assignments in this course take much more time than indicated. Feedback from staff is minimal. If you are not a good programmer, think twice. Nevertheless, the lectures are interesting and well taught. So if you do not want a certicficate, I recommend this. | in this course take much more | Time | than indicated. Feedback from staff is | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | Prof. Taylor's lectures were clear and easy to understand. The course taught the basics of planning pretty well. The teaching staff, unfortunately, was completely unavailable. The solution checkers for the Matlab assignments were very brittle and wasted a lot of students' time. There were several queries about the assignments on the Discussion forums most of which did not elicit any response from the teaching staff. The students ultimately figured it out by spending several laborious hours figuring out the peculiarities of the solution checkers, and by helping each other. This certainly soured my experience with the course. | and wasted a lot of students' | Time | There were several queries about the | Negative | 0.88 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | This is the second of the series, and I had high hopes for this one after the first one was a disappointment. While the material was on the sparse side, the level of the course was more as advertised. The Matlab assignments were not too difficult, but were relevant enough to the material to be acceptable. Some of the assignment simulations/animations were not working, but I was able to submit the results and get full credit. I was ready to give 2 or 3 stars in this review. Unfortunately, on the last assignment, the sample code and scripts was buggy (even towards the end of the course after it had been pointed out to the staff), and inconsistently written. The final project submit script would not work and it was a trial and error troubleshooting to understand why. Some on the discussion boards were able to submit, but other couldn't. Although my assignment would run as I understand the project should, I could not even submit it. Judging from the discussion boards, I'm not the only one with this problem. Again, the University of Pennsylvania has missed the mark with this class and the robotics series. It is regretful that I must again leave a one star review. I realize this is the first time this course was offered, so there are some issues that need to be worked out. I suggest for the remainder of the classes in the series, the creators should do a pilot run first before releasing to Coursera. | I realize this is the first | Time | this course was offered, so there | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The topic is interesting and the lectures itself were good. The explanations of the algorithms and concepts was clear and easy to understand. However, the amount of material covered is very little. I think there should either be more concepts thought or they should be covered in more depth. Quizzes: The quizzes were very weak. They didn't really tell you weather you understood the concept or not. If one of the answers was wrong there was no information which one it was. So you have no idea which lecture you should watch again. Assignments: The assignments were very bad prepared. In some assignments there were bugs in the provided code, we weren't supposed to edit. The assignments itself are rather easy and can be completed quite quickly, if there wasn't the grader. From the grading you got no information what was wrong or which tests passed or failed. Most of the time it wasn't the case that the algorithm failed, instead the output was not as expected by the grader, although it was as described in the assignment. But you never knew. This part has to be improved a lot. Overall I have to say that I expected much more from University of Pennsylvania, especially after taking the first part of the Specialization which was of good quality. | passed or failed. Most of the | Time | it wasn't the case that the | Negative | 0.98 | 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. | Robotics course where the quizzes took | Time | and forced me to think and | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | reasons. I spent most of my | Time | on them not coding the solution, | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | that some simulations took a long | Time | to run which made iterating guesses | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | - and doing this on a | Time | limit is just pointlessly stressful. One | Negative | 0.97 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | I appreciate this is the first | Time | the course has been run, but | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | A great course on Motion Planning for systems, I enjoyed it. I got stuck a few times during assignments, but due to a great community, I was able to pull through and gain a better understand of the course. | it. I got stuck a few | Time | during assignments, but due to a | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| 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. | implementation of different simulations by spending | Time | understanding the given code and also | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The material is interesting, however there is not enough information provided by the course to effectively implement the algorithms in the allotted time of each week's assignments. It relies on deferring to external reading materials as primary sources, and these resources were not specified in advance to secure copies in a timely manner. Additionally, there is a big disconnect between the knowledge provided by the weekly material and what is required to easily do the programming assignments in the suggested time of 3 hours. Overall the course material needs to provide more background material to be more effective in delivering the knowledge expected each week. This may be an artifact of trying to cram what other online course provide in 7-10 weeks down into 4 weeks. If the intention is to give a "flavor" in 4 weeks, then the material needs to be distilled down into more of a cookbook format. | implement the algorithms in the allotted | Time | of each week's assignments. It relies | Positive | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The material is interesting, however there is not enough information provided by the course to effectively implement the algorithms in the allotted time of each week's assignments. It relies on deferring to external reading materials as primary sources, and these resources were not specified in advance to secure copies in a timely manner. Additionally, there is a big disconnect between the knowledge provided by the weekly material and what is required to easily do the programming assignments in the suggested time of 3 hours. Overall the course material needs to provide more background material to be more effective in delivering the knowledge expected each week. This may be an artifact of trying to cram what other online course provide in 7-10 weeks down into 4 weeks. If the intention is to give a "flavor" in 4 weeks, then the material needs to be distilled down into more of a cookbook format. | the programming assignments in the suggested | Time | of 3 hours. Overall the course | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | as an introduction is a really good course. The assignments are interesting and can get you to understand what you are doing. However, the grading system used for the assignment is frustrating.. it is never known what it is actually graded and even if your solution is correct compared to what written in the assignment pdf, most of the times is considered wrong without saying why. | the assignment pdf, most of the | Time | is considered wrong without saying why. | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | I don't have reasons to rate it less but I will recommend that the gap between the course materials and the assignment levels should be bridged. It took significantly more time in course which almost defeated the whole purpose. | be bridged. It took significantly more | Time | in course which almost defeated the | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| 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. | to questions. The total amount of | Time | TA's spend answering questions is just | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| 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. | You will spend way too much | Time | analyzing it for clues as to | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| 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. | merciless. Perhaps, in the feature more | Time | can be devoted to make this | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| 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. | better and I can spend more | Time | learning how the algorithms and maths | Negative | 0.65 | 1.0 |
| 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. | and the automatic grader. At this | Time | I don't feel like my money | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | This is part 2 in the robotics specialization. The course content is way too short and basic for the price. There are about 77 minutes of lecture in total, i.e. less than 20 minutes per week. The first week covers BFS, Dijkstra, and A*, something part of most undergrad programs. The rest of the material is ok but very basic. The programming assignments are "implement Dijkstra" in week 1, "implement Dijkstra on a Torus" (and "do triangles intersect?") in week 2, a very simple for loop in week 3, and "implement gradient descent" in week 4. I could complete the course by looking at it on-and-off over one weekend. The material that is presented is presented well, but there's not enough of it. For reference, part 1 of the robotics specialization had over twice as much lecture content (by time) and then lots of supplementary material in addition to that, quizzes that required some thinking, and more relevant and at least slightly harder programming assignments. | twice as much lecture content (by | Time | and then lots of supplementary material | Negative | 0.63 | 1.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | was worth the time, thanks professor | was worth the | Time | thanks professor | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | Thank you for offering this course. It has taught me a lot of things that I hadn't known. I'm interested in Accounting and there were some times I didn't know where I could gain the materials for study. Now thanks to your courses, I don't need to worry so much. Hope you will continue to produce more | in Accounting and there were some | Time | I didn't know where I could | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | Easiest accounting common sense. If you ever took acct , this will be a wasting of time. | this will be a wasting of | Time | | Negative | 0.93 | 1.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | I would add more examples on how to populate the data, even spend time on optional videos where the professor or his assistant goes through testing ratios (something similar to Operations Analytics). I feel like the professor was rushing through his explanations and the models. Maybe people found the course very useful however I felt like there was too much text and immediate switch to Excel file that was elaborated shortly. Overall, I am not sure how to apply these ratios in my final project... | to populate the data, even spend | Time | on optional videos where the professor | Negative | 0.76 | 3.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | First of all, I would like to express my gratefulness to Coursera who presenting this excellent platform for those who is interested in ongoing lifetime education and hardworking and contributions to bring all the greatest courses from top universities around the world. Second, I thank you Prof Brian and Christopher for all your time, work especially your knowledge that you brought and shared within these videos. I truly appreciate and like the way you teaching and delivering the professional knowledge. To me, as a student who's just started stepping in accounting field, I found that accounting classes is so much interesting done by you, and it is a pure enjoyment as I learnt all the key knowledge. On there other hand, the courses gave me a general clear picture of how important and critical the accounting is in daily business management. I will continue study accounting as I pursue my professional goals and career path. | Brian and Christopher for all your | Time | work especially your knowledge that you | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | i love this course very much! very practical and systematical content. and very useful for accounting profession but its a little bit challenging to follow. I have watched whole the videos for more than 2 times in order to pass the assignment. | the videos for more than 2 | Time | in order to pass the assignment. | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| RFyNbG0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | Very useful and easy to understand. If you have some free time, use it in a smart way taking these classes. | understand. If you have some free | Time | use it in a smart way | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| RFyNbG0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | In my opinion this course does not teach you to 'speak English professionally', but it teaches you to 'learn how to speak English'. I was looking for a course that would teach me how to write professional emails and have professional phone conversations, like which words I should use, what common sentences are or how to build up professional sentences. I am a bit disappointed and think this course was a waste of time for me. This is really meant for people that are learning to speak English and don't know how to pronounce words or how to respond to people in a really easy way. | this course was a waste of | Time | for me. This is really meant | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RFyNbG0iEeW9CAqYJHF3zQ | The course do cover a few facets of speaking English professionally and it's very helpful. I feel, however, it is not so much deep and concrete as it didn't take much time to apply the techniques and cover a boarder range of situations. | concrete as it didn't take much | Time | to apply the techniques and cover | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I probably have to rate this course 5 stars just for the supplementary reading materials provided. There's a lot of great information provided here. This course helps formalize a process that highly talented people just do intuitively. With the information within, you're able to better understand different aspects of your creative process. At times, the professor's delivery can be a little distracting (he has quite a few awkward pauses in the middle of thoughts, and uses the phrase, "right?" a little too unconsciously). I also found some of the lecture material difficult to connect in a practical sense. Some aspects of the design, play, experience model could use better examples in lecture to make the points more concrete. It is a deep model, and they do in fact point you to a whitepaper published on it so there is that, but just for the sake of the lessons; the examples need better explanation. The quizzes were easy, but challenging in the wrong way. Often, questions are posed that weren't ever directly answered in lecture or the materials, and sometimes they are worded in ways that make it difficult to pinpoint what they are looking for. It would be nice to see student responses to the free-response questions make a comeback in future lessons or at least know that they could possibly carry into the material used to teach the next incoming class. The assignments follow a logical progression, and again are supplemented with great materials. The review system is a little wonky. I've posted in the boards about this. They need to make the criteria more clear. The community activity is pretty low. I'm not sure how this can be addressed, but overall this is a great course and perfect second stop on the journey towards the Game Design and Development specialization. | aspects of your creative process. At | Time | the professor's delivery can be a | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I will review this course appointing its pros and cons. Pros: - The instructor: he is a captivating person. It really seems that he like game development, he make jokes and try to make the course interesting. So, he’s personality is makes the course less boring. Cons: - The course name: when I saw “design” in the course name and the icon of course page, I thought it would be related to graphic design, or history telling and so on. But no, the “design” means “project”. So I think a better name would be “Principles of Game Project”. Although, it might be just me who thought this way, because in my language design means something totally different. - The course content: this course should be at the end of the specialization. It is too much abstract and, in some aspects, very obvious. I will not say it is completely useless, because it is not. It gives us a structured view of the stages of game design and its documentation, but I think it would be better if it was like a case study. - The assignments: probably the worst part of the course. They very very complex, to be sincere, none of the assignments I reviewed were full, I gave max grades to many because I think the person tried really hard to make it. Imagine this situation: you are not a programmer, not a graphic designer, not a writer and with a week you need to make a prototype of the game idea you’ve been working on course. This prototype must show the game mechanics and aesthetics, should be playable… And can be non digital? Come on, we are here learning the concepts of developments digital games and the instructor says that we can make a non digital prototype? Some people did it, and I can say for sure that I couldn’t imagine the real game. I made a digital prototype using the knowledge acquired from the first course, but as you can imagine, it is not enough to make our game ideas come true. - The peer review system: the grading is completely non sense, as I said before, the assignments are complex, so it is difficult to show our ideas clearly in a document, without the abilities to make concept arts or something. In 2 of the 4 assignments 2 of the 3 people gave me max grades and 1 gave me bad grades, and did not left any feedback! One of the assignments when I first submitted it I got 12/20. Then, when I resubmitted it, without changing a comma, I got 20/20. So I think this system must change, maybe the mentor should do it. If you want to do all the specialization, ok, go and do this course. But, if this is not your objective, do not waste your time. | your objective, do not waste your | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | corrections were a bit subjective and | Time | consuming. | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Tasks are different in complexity, but time is given the same. Speaker's constantly interrupts sentences. Hard to understand for people, who bad speek English. Questions for peer review are bad: "Mark 5 if work amasing". But we just student, our work are rough, not amasing. And everybody can grade as he wish. | Tasks are different in complexity, but | Time | is given the same. Speaker's constantly | Positive | 0.94 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | A pretty nifty course for game design. I loved getting to work on the documentation planning for the game I was creating. Simple and easy to follow. Some of the quiz questions were a bit tricky as I had spent more time than I though I would, going back to the lectures to review the questions. | tricky as I had spent more | Time | than I though I would, going | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | It's a really good course but I feel like you need more time to really do the assignments, one week between assignments is kind of little time to do all the design. Sometimes the lectures are not directly relationed with the assignments. | I feel like you need more | Time | to really do the assignments, one | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | It's a really good course but I feel like you need more time to really do the assignments, one week between assignments is kind of little time to do all the design. Sometimes the lectures are not directly relationed with the assignments. | between assignments is kind of little | Time | to do all the design. Sometimes | Negative | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | One big user-experience comment is that I wish that the videos had been edited; there are many long pauses and times where there is a lot of talking around the thing that you actually want to say. I think you have some great things to say, but perhaps streamlining those ideas and editing out the times when you need to pause to think (which is definitely legitimate when recording yourself!) or other things of that nature, would have definitely cut down on the length of the videos. Long videos aren't bad, if they are well put-together and conveying information in an engaging way. | there are many long pauses and | Time | where there is a lot of | Positive | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | One big user-experience comment is that I wish that the videos had been edited; there are many long pauses and times where there is a lot of talking around the thing that you actually want to say. I think you have some great things to say, but perhaps streamlining those ideas and editing out the times when you need to pause to think (which is definitely legitimate when recording yourself!) or other things of that nature, would have definitely cut down on the length of the videos. Long videos aren't bad, if they are well put-together and conveying information in an engaging way. | those ideas and editing out the | Time | when you need to pause to | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This was a very wordy course. Some times it felt like they just kept repeating and rambling, but I did learn the proper documentation for big games. | was a very wordy course. Some | Time | it felt like they just kept | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course has a good starting point, but there are so many things that ended up being wrong that I just can't force myself to give it more than 3 stars (and I'm not sure if it should be 3 or 2 stars). I think this is also the first course on Coursera that didn't get 5 stars from me (not sure if I've given 4 stars once only). So the bad parts first: Assignments are so unrealistic it's unbelievable. Week 1 is doable. Week 2 is problematic if you have a complex idea, let's say it's still doable, but you would certainly need more time than expected weekly hour work. Week 3 is insane. It is so out of the scope of this course. And week 4 is even worse, I had to use pen and paper and then explain only 1 of the core mechanics (even that used more than expected weekly hour work). Some of the quizzes are not fully clear if you are not a native English speaker. Sometimes I had to re-read things several times, and still wasn't sure what I was doing wrong (I realized that only after I managed to literally guess the correct answer). And most of all grading is the worst I've seen in any course. All of it based on a personal opinion. Hey I even managed not to get full points for a "document is HTML/PDF/....". I mean - how can I not get full points there? It either is or is not a HTML. It's so much subjective that it's making it awful. Now about the good parts: Professor did a great job, the course inspired so many ideas for me. The material is concise and it was a pleasure listening to this course. Most of the courses are too slow for me, so I have to fast forward them to 1.5 and some even to 2 times speed. I've run this course only on 1.25 speed, which is a good thing. I'm not a native English speaker. | but you would certainly need more | Time | than expected weekly hour work. Week | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course has a good starting point, but there are so many things that ended up being wrong that I just can't force myself to give it more than 3 stars (and I'm not sure if it should be 3 or 2 stars). I think this is also the first course on Coursera that didn't get 5 stars from me (not sure if I've given 4 stars once only). So the bad parts first: Assignments are so unrealistic it's unbelievable. Week 1 is doable. Week 2 is problematic if you have a complex idea, let's say it's still doable, but you would certainly need more time than expected weekly hour work. Week 3 is insane. It is so out of the scope of this course. And week 4 is even worse, I had to use pen and paper and then explain only 1 of the core mechanics (even that used more than expected weekly hour work). Some of the quizzes are not fully clear if you are not a native English speaker. Sometimes I had to re-read things several times, and still wasn't sure what I was doing wrong (I realized that only after I managed to literally guess the correct answer). And most of all grading is the worst I've seen in any course. All of it based on a personal opinion. Hey I even managed not to get full points for a "document is HTML/PDF/....". I mean - how can I not get full points there? It either is or is not a HTML. It's so much subjective that it's making it awful. Now about the good parts: Professor did a great job, the course inspired so many ideas for me. The material is concise and it was a pleasure listening to this course. Most of the courses are too slow for me, so I have to fast forward them to 1.5 and some even to 2 times speed. I've run this course only on 1.25 speed, which is a good thing. I'm not a native English speaker. | I had to re-read things several | Time | and still wasn't sure what I | Positive | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course has a good starting point, but there are so many things that ended up being wrong that I just can't force myself to give it more than 3 stars (and I'm not sure if it should be 3 or 2 stars). I think this is also the first course on Coursera that didn't get 5 stars from me (not sure if I've given 4 stars once only). So the bad parts first: Assignments are so unrealistic it's unbelievable. Week 1 is doable. Week 2 is problematic if you have a complex idea, let's say it's still doable, but you would certainly need more time than expected weekly hour work. Week 3 is insane. It is so out of the scope of this course. And week 4 is even worse, I had to use pen and paper and then explain only 1 of the core mechanics (even that used more than expected weekly hour work). Some of the quizzes are not fully clear if you are not a native English speaker. Sometimes I had to re-read things several times, and still wasn't sure what I was doing wrong (I realized that only after I managed to literally guess the correct answer). And most of all grading is the worst I've seen in any course. All of it based on a personal opinion. Hey I even managed not to get full points for a "document is HTML/PDF/....". I mean - how can I not get full points there? It either is or is not a HTML. It's so much subjective that it's making it awful. Now about the good parts: Professor did a great job, the course inspired so many ideas for me. The material is concise and it was a pleasure listening to this course. Most of the courses are too slow for me, so I have to fast forward them to 1.5 and some even to 2 times speed. I've run this course only on 1.25 speed, which is a good thing. I'm not a native English speaker. | 5 and some even to 2 | Time | speed. I've run this course only | Negative | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | While I really liked the first course I have massive problems with this course. The first 2 assignments, a high concept document and a story bible were doable. But a full GDD and a prototype on week 3 and 4? These aren't part-time tasks for a few days, these are full-time tasks for at least a full month each to do them properly from scratch. These assignments are so unrealistically hard that they demotivate. And I'm saying that as someone who already had quite some ideas for one game and even started experimental programming. For people that are taking this specialization without a focus on game design and/or without ideas... this course is going to be hell to finish in time. | to be hell to finish in | Time | | Negative | 0.72 | 2.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The information is great, but I think they need to make this course in two phases because there was a lot of information to process and the assignments need more time if you want to do a good work. The other part that I didn't like was that the information doesn't really correspond to what you actually need to do for your assignments, I think the course needs more videos and examples of how to create the required documents. | process and the assignments need more | Time | if you want to do a | Negative | 0.86 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The course material is good, and Casey always gives further reads and references. I specially liked to have book references and I started to read one of those. I found however a disconnection between the idea of using the MDA/DPE framework described in the course, and the actual projects which were more into creating the set of documents used in game design to collect the details, create a better picture, and think better about the game. In some way, the iterative process of coming back to the idea, from document to document, helped to refine the game, but it happened more as something natural. I wished we would have had some sort of checklist to evaluate and apply during the design process the framework. As feedback to the instructor, I think he needs to stop using the ending word "right?" to finish his sentences. At some point, of the course it became really difficult to follow, right?. right?. right? ... ufff ... Also, I believe he knows a lot, but a bit of preparation and flow in his lectures would be appreciated. Maybe the use of some sort of autoclue, would help. Last, but this could be more for the course editors, the instructor has good slides and material, but usually during the lectures the slides disappear (just in the moment one need to focus his attention in the written material) and the instructor appears in first plane. I think you could keep the instructor in a PIP box all the time, and perhaps put him in first plane only at the beginning and end. | in a PIP box all the | Time | and perhaps put him in first | Positive | 0.64 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | At the start, I felt this course was mostly uninteresting, irrelevant and unnecessary. Pretty much a waste of time. But as things progressed, I discovered there were lots of great theory and concepts introduced that play a critical role in how the game industry and professionals need to think and work. My only complaint after having completed this course is that the instructors didn't do a good job explaining why this course should be taken. Once you're in and working your way through, you should see the importance. But on first glance it sounds irrelevant. | unnecessary. Pretty much a waste of | Time | But as things progressed, I discovered | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Very helpful information with lots of solid, practical advise (prototype! test!) and a few important questions to think about (genderfication? accessibility?) when designing. Excellent learning experience for game design documentation. Quite worth the time and effort. Thank you! | game design documentation. Quite worth the | Time | and effort. Thank you! | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | A lot was discussed, and many resources were offered, but I felt the general direction offered was too loose. When time came to do each week's assignment, I was not always sure how to execute. | direction offered was too loose. When | Time | came to do each week's assignment, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Although the course content is highly informative and interesting, the way it's all presented it not the best, most of the time concepts are confusing because of this, quizzes become guessing games most of the time. Forums feel neglected by the course tutor, lot's of question that someone knowledgeable should answer become random rambling as nobody is sure as to what the tutor actually meant. As somebody said on the forums "I feel like I'm alpha testing your course". | not the best, most of the | Time | concepts are confusing because of this, | Positive | 0.68 | 3.0 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Although the course content is highly informative and interesting, the way it's all presented it not the best, most of the time concepts are confusing because of this, quizzes become guessing games most of the time. Forums feel neglected by the course tutor, lot's of question that someone knowledgeable should answer become random rambling as nobody is sure as to what the tutor actually meant. As somebody said on the forums "I feel like I'm alpha testing your course". | become guessing games most of the | Time | Forums feel neglected by the course | Positive | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | Very interesting overview of the energy business. I would encourage Michael Orlando to release other more specialized courses on hot topics such as the levelized cost of generation resources, electricity or natural gas market dynamics,... I would thank you Michael Orlando for his time and effort to make this course available to all of those interested in energy matters. Antonio | thank you Michael Orlando for his | Time | and effort to make this course | Negative | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | Great work of the Professor Michael Orlando, going from the general but at the same time technical part of the different resources to the more specific analysis in the bussines part. The way of explaining how to do market analysis is incredibly useful not only for this kind of market, but for any the students have to do in their professional life; in my case related to consuting the explanation has been fruitful. Thank you so much for the course ! :D | the general but at the same | Time | technical part of the different resources | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | Pace was slow and I was disappointed by the content level. From the title I thought this would give information about the "global energy business" but the focus is generally on the US, except for portions that discussed location/ use of global resources and demand and supply levels globally. The class begins with analyzing Supply & Demand curves for energy use and production which was interesting to me and I thought meant we'd be taking an economic view throughout. Then the large middle section covers very basic info about the types of energy production (coal, oil, NG, renewables) in the world -- low in factual content considering the time spent on each topic. The final section about political considerations was very basic and only focused on the US. I am amazed that the 3 branches of US government were explained on the simplest level; this is a middle school & high school topic in the US. I expected a more in-depth class with details and analysis about the global energy business. I am glad I did not choose to pay for the certificate. | low in factual content considering the | Time | spent on each topic. The final | Negative | 0.82 | 2.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | Covered a great deal of ground in a short period of time. Heavy economics. | ground in a short period of | Time | Heavy economics. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| RKMa0PTnEeSR9SIAC7LYOA | i don't have an economic background, it took me a lot of time to understand in depth the expressions used and meanings. i admit that i have learned a lot. i understand now different aspects of the energy business, how to think about it as a whole integrated in a bigger system. i recommend this course for anyone who is involved in energy, even if you are not, you will learn a lot how the global energy business is working. Thanks a lot for the staff effort, special thanks to prof. Orlando. | it took me a lot of | Time | to understand in depth the expressions | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| RLshf_xsEeWa_RIigsB41Q | A little bit awkward at times, but gets across what it's supposed to. Great ideas for teaching! | A little bit awkward at | Time | but gets across what it's supposed | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | An order of magnitude more difficult than the intro course. Unexpectedly tricky at times ( esp. if you're primarily versed in programming & not stats ) but more all the more worth it for the difficulty spike. | the intro course. Unexpectedly tricky at | Time | ( esp. if you're primarily versed | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This was a challenging class and it took me quite some time to figure things out. But I feel I learned something. Definitely check the tips provided my the mentors in the forums | and it took me quite some | Time | to figure things out. But I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | From my past experience, I know it’s not easy for people to take suggestions. But I still want to have a try this time. I had high hopes for this course, but I am quite disappointed. I think Dr. Peng needs to improve his teaching skills. 1. Good teaching is clear, concise, and right to the point. So please slow down, speak. Don’t mumble. 2. Programming is a practical skill. So the best method to learn programming is to use step-by-step demos. You can talk about a concept for 5 to 10 minutes but I still can’t get it. Use a demo and I can get it right away. 3. Don’t just try to cover the materials so you think you have done the teaching, try to understand how your students learn and make sure they really get it. 4. If you haven’t covered some concept, don’t assume your students will understand it by magic. A good teacher can make the learning experience effortless and fun, a poor teacher makes it like a torture. | want to have a try this | Time | I had high hopes for this | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | There are huge gaps between learning materials (videos) and assignments. Assignments are very difficult and definitely not for R beginners. Also assignments' instruction are a little difficult to understand. I wonder if the purpose of assignments is to exam our reading and understanding abilities or the skills of R!!! I also took courses <Getting and Cleaning Data> and <Exploratory Data Analysis> at the same time and these two courses' assignments are much easier than the course <R Programming>. Writing function in R really isn't that easy especially for an R beginner who only has little knowledge of R packages and functions. I really don't think this course should arrange as the second course to take in this Data Science course series. | <Exploratory Data Analysis> at the same | Time | and these two courses' assignments are | Positive | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | More examples are expected to give. Please don't write too much explanations in PPT during the speech. It is hard to focus on the talking and the slides at the same time. More pictures or graphs are recommended to replace the sentences. | and the slides at the same | Time | More pictures or graphs are recommended | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a "limited and reasonable" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to "invest" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to "learn" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be "accurate and complete". This course has so many "incomplete" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to "find" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic "time waster". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for "full time students" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera. | " limited and reasonable" amount of | Time | spent in the course. The role | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a "limited and reasonable" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to "invest" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to "learn" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be "accurate and complete". This course has so many "incomplete" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to "find" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic "time waster". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for "full time students" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera. | should be to " invest" the | Time | to provide the concepts and information | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a "limited and reasonable" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to "invest" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to "learn" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be "accurate and complete". This course has so many "incomplete" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to "find" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic "time waster". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for "full time students" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera. | that it requires insurmountable amounts of | Time | to " find" the concepts required | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a "limited and reasonable" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to "invest" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to "learn" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be "accurate and complete". This course has so many "incomplete" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to "find" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic "time waster". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for "full time students" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera. | hence it becomes a gigantic " | Time | waster" . Unfortunate! the tool and | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a "limited and reasonable" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to "invest" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to "learn" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be "accurate and complete". This course has so many "incomplete" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to "find" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic "time waster". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for "full time students" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera. | way is only for " full | Time | students" that have only one obligation, | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Overall a good crash course and introduction to R. Its a lot to learn in 4 weeks and some of the assignments were challenging (which I liked). I think the course is worth taking but I do wish the material and assignments were packaged better - more aligned. Just be prepared to spend a lot of time online reading, researching, and learning some concepts on your own. Don't expect to learn everything from the lectures and materials to be successful in this course. | prepared to spend a lot of | Time | online reading, researching, and learning some | Negative | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I am learning a lot through the assignments! make it more difficult next time so that people start exploring a lot | assignments! make it more difficult next | Time | so that people start exploring a | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The course is properly designed for people new to R programming, assignments are bit time consuming. Overall i am happy with what i have learnt. | to R programming, assignments are bit | Time | consuming. Overall i am happy with | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Difficult at times, I regularly used outside websites like stackoverflow to help with assignments, but that's how the real world works, there's no way that the lectures could solve all your problems. Favorite: writing my own functions that searched real databases and returned means, ranks, and useful info. I felt like I took a huge step forward in my goal for data science. Least favorite: Assignment #2, it felt completely unrelated to anything I learned, I wasted hours just to find out it was redundantly simple and in the end I didn't even find out if my code worked, the grade was peer-reviewed based on if you could correctly upload it to github and if it "looked" like it would work. (How would I know! LOL, I assumed all my peers' code was good enough) Would 100% take this course again. | Difficult at | Time | I regularly used outside websites like | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | the presentations are very hard to follow, it requires a lot of extra time reading the professor's book | it requires a lot of extra | Time | reading the professor's book | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Teaching R programming can't be with reading from slides, the swirl library was helpful but not enough to grasp R, interactive learning with programming should be the way to go. I spend a lot of time learning from tutorials online.. Note: I am an experienced programmer with Python C#, and I found it difficult to learn this way. | go. I spend a lot of | Time | learning from tutorials online. . Note: | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I had really high hopes for this course. I am not a programmer, though in college I learned C, C++, and used MATLAB a fair amount. I wanted to learn R because it is a free software versus paying a licencing fee to use SPSS which I have done in the past. I had already completed the first week of the course and the first week in this course. I went through the slides and I didn't really feel like I learned any actual programming so then to expect to answer questions where you had to program seemed a bit out of left field. As a comparison it felt like they had an hour worth of slides talking about different trees and how to differentiate them then asked you to drive a tank. I then took the time go through two swirl assignments which I hoped was going to fill in the many gaps left by the slides. They were definitely more helpful than the slide show, but I still felt like they would teach you how to add then ask you to multiply. So in general my recommendation would be not to take the course unless you have a fairly solid understand of programming, otherwise you will do what I did and just wasted $50. | a tank. I then took the | Time | go through two swirl assignments which | Negative | 0.84 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A great way to learn a new language is through use, using Swirl to teach the language R and at the same time concepts in data science was such an efficient and effect approach. Thank you | language R and at the same | Time | concepts in data science was such | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Course does not do a good job actually explaining R or training you on how to properly use it. The lectures go over the material very fast and you do not get much out of them, and then the assignments throw complex problems that are very difficult. You spend most of your time Googling to learn it, and I find that I would have learned R better if I just did that to start without this course. Maybe if you aren't new to R and have a programming background, it may not be so bad, but if you are new to R and not an experienced programmer, this is not the class to take to learn it. | difficult. You spend most of your | Time | Googling to learn it, and I | Negative | 0.74 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Was tough enough to give me the feel of solving real problems. Would have appreciated a little more explanation of the return types of the looping functions, all time was spent on the parameters and no time on what the data structure returned is. Online documentation is also weak on this point so some instruction would have been helpful. | types of the looping functions, all | Time | was spent on the parameters and | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Was tough enough to give me the feel of solving real problems. Would have appreciated a little more explanation of the return types of the looping functions, all time was spent on the parameters and no time on what the data structure returned is. Online documentation is also weak on this point so some instruction would have been helpful. | spent on the parameters and no | Time | on what the data structure returned | Negative | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | It's very nice ,but it's a pity that i didn't have so much time to learn it. | that i didn't have so much | Time | to learn it. | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This course was difficult for me to grasp. The instructor (I believe) assumes that all participants have some background in programming, and since I do not, I have a very difficult time following the examples. I bought the entire series of classes, but need to retake this one after I read some more from other sources and have had a chance to digest what's here. | not, I have a very difficult | Time | following the examples. I bought the | Positive | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Loved the assignments. Stick with the problem sets for some time! :) | with the problem sets for some | Time | :) | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| 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. | will probably have an extremely hard | Time | solving them, considering that many of | Positive | 0.79 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | R Programming has solid information and exercises on just that! However the videos and sections for each week are not very clearly structured. Sometimes the end assignment can take many times the number of hours the rest of the content in a week requires. I'd be careful about taking this course while working unless you can devote serious time to programming projects on your off days. That stated, the course is excellent otherwise. | the end assignment can take many | Time | the number of hours the rest | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | R Programming has solid information and exercises on just that! However the videos and sections for each week are not very clearly structured. Sometimes the end assignment can take many times the number of hours the rest of the content in a week requires. I'd be careful about taking this course while working unless you can devote serious time to programming projects on your off days. That stated, the course is excellent otherwise. | working unless you can devote serious | Time | to programming projects on your off | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Videos are poorly narrated and are marginally effective: vocabulary + key concepts only. The "swirl" exercises are woefully inadequate to prepare students for the quizzes. Foundational tasks (i.e. establishing a valid connection to the sample data) are conspicuously absent from the guided exercises; leaving too many students to seek help from message boards and google. Lastly, the "professors" are completely unreachable: they may as well be dead. After 30 years in the IT industry, I found this course to be profoundly aggravating and a complete waste of my time - I have abandoned this course and bought a "Teach Yourself" book instead. | and a complete waste of my | Time | - I have abandoned this course | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The jump from the lecture material to the assignments was way too much. In order to complete the assignments, one needs to spend lots of time learning things not covered in the course. | one needs to spend lots of | Time | learning things not covered in the | Negative | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Why should I waste my time listening to someone reading a book to me... | Why should I waste my | Time | listening to someone reading a book | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is course was pretty hard for someone like me without any background in computer programming. I had to take it twice to pass it. Luckily, there are many wonderful people in Coursera and in R who are always willing to lend a hand. Even if you pass all the basic requirements of the course i encourage you to do an exploration on your own. There are so many things to learn to make your job easy and to give inspiration to improve your performance in whatever field your in. It might feel like you're not learning at times or it's too difficult to continue, but once you get there, you'll realize how this wonderful new tool can help you with data analysis and presentation. | feel like you're not learning at | Time | or it's too difficult to continue, | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | i feel this courses needs to be split into two different streams. One for beginners and one for people who are more comfortable with coding and R. I think that the learning curve is too steep for a part time course. | is too steep for a part | Time | course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Excellent course. Good videos, very nice programming exercises. Perfect for someone who wants to learn R for the first time. | to learn R for the first | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Great course to start getting your hands into R. While the lectures are OK and the Swirl exercises are great, the course falls a bit short in building you up to tackling the weekly programming assignments. I had to spend a lot of time researching on my own to complete the assignments. I don't mind that, but I could do that on my own without paying for the course. I'm paying because I want to learn R quickly without spending hours researching what could have easily been described in the lectures. A lot of times, the course mentors in the discussion forums provided the best guidance. I would have liked each programming exercise to build upon the last one, so that at the end of the course I would have a great R product to review later. As it is, each programming assignment can stand on its own. When learning to programming in a new language, I prefer small, quick victories that build upon one another to accomplish a great task. This is the reason for not giving full 5-stars. Otherwise, Dr. Peng does a good job at providing material. And, be sure to check out his podcast, Not So Standard Deviations, to remind you that even people who have been in this field for years still find some areas challenging. It gives us R beginners some mental support. | had to spend a lot of | Time | researching on my own to complete | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Great course to start getting your hands into R. While the lectures are OK and the Swirl exercises are great, the course falls a bit short in building you up to tackling the weekly programming assignments. I had to spend a lot of time researching on my own to complete the assignments. I don't mind that, but I could do that on my own without paying for the course. I'm paying because I want to learn R quickly without spending hours researching what could have easily been described in the lectures. A lot of times, the course mentors in the discussion forums provided the best guidance. I would have liked each programming exercise to build upon the last one, so that at the end of the course I would have a great R product to review later. As it is, each programming assignment can stand on its own. When learning to programming in a new language, I prefer small, quick victories that build upon one another to accomplish a great task. This is the reason for not giving full 5-stars. Otherwise, Dr. Peng does a good job at providing material. And, be sure to check out his podcast, Not So Standard Deviations, to remind you that even people who have been in this field for years still find some areas challenging. It gives us R beginners some mental support. | in the lectures. A lot of | Time | the course mentors in the discussion | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The lectures and Swirl exercises are extremely easy to understand and follow, but then the assignments are incredibly complicated and difficult. The assignments ask for techniques that aren't focused on or even covered in the lectures. The tips offered by Al Warren in the Discussion forum make the assignments possible to do. Since the tips are so critical to understanding and completing the assignments, I think Al Warren's tips should be incorporated as part of the core course. This course needs more time to be covered in depth - it's a lot of ground to cover in just one month, | core course. This course needs more | Time | to be covered in depth - | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I felt this course had the right amount of depth for the time provided. It wasn't overwhelming but was still deep enough to be useful. | right amount of depth for the | Time | provided. It wasn't overwhelming but was | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I managed to complete this course, but that was because of my four years of "MOOC-level" "programming experience" and duckduckgo (~google), not because of the course material. Videos are dull readings of the pdfs, with many "ummmm"s and annoying lip-clicks. Examples are useless, explanations are often vague or even incomplete. The assignments are relatively hard in that you don't get all the necessary info from the course, sometimes even R's own manpages aren't enough. (Which is a shame, as you'd expect a course to teach you how to use the tools you will need for the assignments.) If you have no programming experience, stay away from this course! Otherwise, if you want to learn R, look for other resources, and save yourself some time and money. | other resources, and save yourself some | Time | and money. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A very challenging course for a beginner, but if you are ready to invest time and effort, you will definitely manage it. A point that should definitely be mentioned is that the course is not self-sufficient, so to speak: you will need to do a lot of additional research, googling, ask questions on forums and maybe even take additional courses in parallel in order to make it to the end. But once that steep learning curve is overcome, you will enjoy all the benefits and, above all, will be well-armed to continue in the specialization. | if you are ready to invest | Time | and effort, you will definitely manage | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A bit of a deep plunge if you've never coded before, yet too shallow to satisfactorily introduce someone skilled in other languages to the many peculiarities of R. I don't envy instructors trying to balance these two needs in such a short time. | two needs in such a short | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | You can learn basic functions of R and do practical assignments on your own. However, the assignments are a little bit challenging, and students need to take some time to figure it out, especially for people who are not familiar with programming. | and students need to take some | Time | to figure it out, especially for | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The video lectures were not on par with the, in my opinion, extremely demanding programming assignments. I'd say some knowledge of advanced coding was required in order to complete the assignments, or alternatively, lots of time to learn by yourself on google and forums, which wasn't really the point, was it. | the assignments, or alternatively, lots of | Time | to learn by yourself on google | Negative | 0.73 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Although this course covers quite a bit of the fundamentals of R programming, you will need to use the web quite a bit in order to complete the assignments if you are not familiar with R. I could complete the assignments, but it took me a very long time, as some of the required R commands were not taught in this course (granted, if you are willing to fill in the gaps through google and the wonderful answers from all the guys and gals at StackOverflow, you can complete them, as I did). If you have no previous R experience, like me, but you can hold your own at programming,(me again) you can pass the course. If you have never coded, I think the course would be next to impossible; bear that in mind. | it took me a very long | Time | as some of the required R | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thought this course could've been much more effective. The content felt very random and esoteric at times. Especially the programming assignment on cached results. I get it. I'm a programmer at heart. But this is at the margin of usefulness. How about a segment on running regressions? Or doing some real data analysis? | felt very random and esoteric at | Time | Especially the programming assignment on cached | Positive | 0.91 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Assignments can be made better. They should increase in level of difficulty , rather than making them quite tough for first time R programmers. | making them quite tough for first | Time | R programmers. | Positive | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Assignment is a bit too hard for entry level students, especially if we have to complete it in a week considering some students might be full time employees or students. However, assignment is very good for practice. Might consider adding more contents to let students learn more about build their own functions. | considering some students might be full | Time | employees or students. However, assignment is | Negative | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This was a very challenging class for someone who had no prior programming experience. However, with enough time and effort, I was able to succeed in the course. | prior programming experience. However, with enough | Time | and effort, I was able to | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Huge gap between theory and programming assignments, however quizzes are interesting and require some time to complete. | quizzes are interesting and require some | Time | to complete. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | It is a very well organised course. I really like the swirl assignment programming assignments. It for doing exercise and learning at the same time. I am very much impressed and learning a lot. | exercise and learning at the same | Time | I am very much impressed and | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The videos were helpful, but too fast. Not a lot of time is spent on any of the functions of F. Swirl helps but not a lot. | too fast. Not a lot of | Time | is spent on any of the | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | It was a good class to begin with however it would have helped to tailor it more towards newcomers to programming language in general. I also would have like it if Roger would have highlighted or circled, or something to specify where in the slide he was talking about. I felt that at times it was hard to follow where exactly he was talking about and what part of the code/function he was mentioning. Im a visual learner and that would have been greatly beneficial. | talking about. I felt that at | Time | it was hard to follow where | Negative | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Last assignment was pretty rough because there appears to be a lot of functions required that weren't covered in class but maybe it got lost in the amount of information thrown at you in the short time. Or perhaps researching how to use new functions is part of the point. Great class and learned a ton!! | thrown at you in the short | Time | Or perhaps researching how to use | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Overall it's a good course and I've learned a lot from it. But I think It'd be great to have more examples and context on how and why use those functions. To me R is a really quirky language and isn't really intuitive to use and it doesn't have a lot of functions that other programming languages have such as push and pop for lists. I remember spending like 5 hours trying to get it to work in a way that I'm more used to but then realized it could be done in a completely different manner. Most of the time I spend so much time on trivial stuff which I think can be avoided if more explanation is provided. | completely different manner. Most of the | Time | I spend so much time on | Negative | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Overall it's a good course and I've learned a lot from it. But I think It'd be great to have more examples and context on how and why use those functions. To me R is a really quirky language and isn't really intuitive to use and it doesn't have a lot of functions that other programming languages have such as push and pop for lists. I remember spending like 5 hours trying to get it to work in a way that I'm more used to but then realized it could be done in a completely different manner. Most of the time I spend so much time on trivial stuff which I think can be avoided if more explanation is provided. | the time I spend so much | Time | on trivial stuff which I think | Negative | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Great overview of R with practical lessons. It was challenging and frustrating at times and I learned a lot. | It was challenging and frustrating at | Time | and I learned a lot. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | First time taking on R after so many years! Great and informative course! | First | Time | taking on R after so many | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The content was great, especially the swirl() library. The instructions were a little confusing at times, but the online advisors helped to sort it out. | instructions were a little confusing at | Time | but the online advisors helped to | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A quick warm up course for new learner in R. I spent a week to went through the course material and most of the experiment/programming tasks. Now feel quite comfortable to basic R. The course might be improved if more time are spent on some concrete case studies. Some useful functions/routines like str, csv header preprocessing are very handy and it is great to learn these. The last part, debug and profile seem not big concerns for new learners. | course might be improved if more | Time | are spent on some concrete case | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | R Programming in Coursera is a great course. You will learn a lot about R and a lot about advanced programming. But you will suffer along the way. Every lesson brings tons of knowledge, and every quiz will leave you with the feeling you only knew half of what was needed. You will have to fill in the blanks, which is easier if you have previous knowledge of R and/or have previous coding know-how. From someone who had taken other R programming courses, I loved and hated this one at the same time. It's a great way to really learn R, but be ready to put the additional hours and reading required to successfully pass. | hated this one at the same | Time | It's a great way to really | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is NOT a step-wise introduction to R for the novice. Useful in many respects, but the uninitiated to the field need more time, slow increments in project difficulty and more thorough, step by step explanations. I think the designers of the course wrongly assume that ALL R programming should be taught in THIS course which is erroneous; it should be about laying the foundations, on which the student can then expand his/her R programming abilities. | uninitiated to the field need more | Time | slow increments in project difficulty and | Positive | 0.85 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The course takes more time and is more informative than the Toolbox course. The material in the videos is quite more basic than the material in the quizzes and assignments, but that should be expected. The only improvement I would suggest is to give lecture material on the deeper concepts involved in the assignments. | The course takes more | Time | and is more informative than the | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very essential topics, but the instructor's delivery of content is inconsistent, glosses over explanations at time, "umms and arrrs" a lot, talks extremely fast at times. Making this course quite hard to follow. Disclosure: English if my first language. Not new to programming. Not new to MOOC courses. | is inconsistent, glosses over explanations at | Time | " umms and arrrs" a lot, | Negative | 0.7 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very essential topics, but the instructor's delivery of content is inconsistent, glosses over explanations at time, "umms and arrrs" a lot, talks extremely fast at times. Making this course quite hard to follow. Disclosure: English if my first language. Not new to programming. Not new to MOOC courses. | a lot, talks extremely fast at | Time | Making this course quite hard to | Positive | 0.68 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Waste money and time! Do not explain very well! | Waste money and | Time | Do not explain very well! | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I love R. This course is a great introduction to being programming in R. It is not easy, and this is the 4th time I have enrolled and will finally be completing the course (yay!). Plan to watch all videos (I watch them on 3/4 speed) and re-watch many of them for clarification. It may be easier for those with prior programming experience. Don't let week 2 get you down, do the SWIRL exercises, and ask for help from your classmates. | easy, and this is the 4th | Time | I have enrolled and will finally | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Good introduction to R. Without my programming background, I think this course would be more difficult. For example, when I think I should use a switch statement in an assignment, I already know what a switch is, I just need to search online to learn how to do it in R. At the same time, speaking as someone who's worked in software engineering, a lot of any programming job is not about being taught everything but being taught enough to then go out, search online, and find out what you need to get the job done. | it in R. At the same | Time | speaking as someone who's worked in | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Bit unclear examples at times, scripts have excessive writing. Otherwise great experience :) | Bit unclear examples at | Time | scripts have excessive writing. Otherwise great | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | You can't do assignments using the lecture materials. Need A LOT of time to finish this course. | lecture materials. Need A LOT of | Time | to finish this course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very poorly constructed. There are major jumps in the difficulty of material that are completely unnecessary. The material could very easily be broken down into more manageable and comprehensible chunks. There is no repetition of any exercise or function to engrain any of the material. This course suffers grossly from the "curse of knowledge". If it were structured in a way where (a) material was broken down into smaller bits, ideally as beta tested by true rank novices and (b) all materials or specific functions were presented with repetition, similar to how khan academy structures its math section, then this course would be much better. I would also assume, given a and b, that there would be higher retention and comprehension. The expected time requirements are also wildly amiss. Try beta testing this on TRUE rank novices. The program suggests that this is for "beginners". I find it doubtful that a true beginner would fare well in this course. | higher retention and comprehension. The expected | Time | requirements are also wildly amiss. Try | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Excellent introductory discussions in the videos. The in-R Swirl tutorial is superb - a great way to force you to type out the basic concepts. Assignments are challenging as they leave a little ambiguity, making you get familiar with the help system and online searches. This course isn't the fastest way to get an overview of R, but it's a great way to get a little more than an overview, including some practical experience, if you're willing to put in a little time and work through some bumps. | willing to put in a little | Time | and work through some bumps. | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I spent a year coding, working on other programming languages and came back to this one a second time. I had the same exact learning issues as before. Luckily I had a better background but still had trouble going from lecture to exams. Swirl() is great. | back to this one a second | Time | I had the same exact learning | Positive | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The teacher goes very fast with the concepts without really spending much time on each of them. It will be great if instead of covering all things in short amount of time, the teacher could write R code using each type of function in console so that students know exactly what to expect. | the concepts without really spending much | Time | on each of them. It will | Positive | 0.65 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The teacher goes very fast with the concepts without really spending much time on each of them. It will be great if instead of covering all things in short amount of time, the teacher could write R code using each type of function in console so that students know exactly what to expect. | all things in short amount of | Time | the teacher could write R code | Negative | 0.85 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The course had too much stuff crunched (and poorly explained) in too short a time period. That said, I got something out of it using a self-directed approach. | poorly explained) in too short a | Time | period. That said, I got something | Negative | 0.65 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are a beginner, this course's assignments will be quite difficult to solve but not impossible. Nevertheless, the course will give you the incentive to try and learn on your own, with the help of Rforums, the Coursera discussions, Google etc. I would appreciate it if some things would be explained in more detail. A beginner most definitely needs more time to spend on the course than the hours estimated. | A beginner most definitely needs more | Time | to spend on the course than | Positive | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is a challenging course because there is a marked gap between the video lectures and the weekly assignments. This course will be far more demanding of your time and willingness to fail that the Data Scientist's Toolbox. If you have the time and resilience to search out support materials and frequently peruse the Discussion threads, you will be able to find what you need. My peers with programming experience confirmed that there is too wide a gap between the content delivered in the video lectures and the demands of the coding assignments. If you decide to take this course, be sure to do the swirl exercises so you get a feel of how the R functions work. When you grade your peers' work, you might notice that more than a few decided to plagiarize code from others. The videos need to be redone. Effective instructors know that students learn by seeing examples, not by listening to broad descriptions of what a function can do. | be far more demanding of your | Time | and willingness to fail that the | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is a challenging course because there is a marked gap between the video lectures and the weekly assignments. This course will be far more demanding of your time and willingness to fail that the Data Scientist's Toolbox. If you have the time and resilience to search out support materials and frequently peruse the Discussion threads, you will be able to find what you need. My peers with programming experience confirmed that there is too wide a gap between the content delivered in the video lectures and the demands of the coding assignments. If you decide to take this course, be sure to do the swirl exercises so you get a feel of how the R functions work. When you grade your peers' work, you might notice that more than a few decided to plagiarize code from others. The videos need to be redone. Effective instructors know that students learn by seeing examples, not by listening to broad descriptions of what a function can do. | Scientist's Toolbox. If you have the | Time | and resilience to search out support | Negative | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Don't take this course unless you have a programming background. Week 2 has a programming assignment that is way to advanced for students without any programming knowledge. This assignment deals with functions, where the code is complicated. What's unfortunate is that you have to finish ever assignment, including this impossible assignment (for beginners) to get recognition for the course. I spent most of my time researching other sources for information because the lectures, and the supplemental information given on a different site, by the instructor (which indicate knowledge that the lectures are insufficient) give trivial examples when the programming assignments are anything but. This course needs some serious adjustments, either with the prerequisites needed for success in this course, or with the material within the assignments themselves. | course. I spent most of my | Time | researching other sources for information because | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I really enjoyed learning R and stepping up the skills for using R. I really appreciate this great opportunity to learn exquisite classes for free at home. I do think this is as amazing as the Industrial Revolution. It is the Educational Revolution! BUT it seems errors occur (in some assignments), and I feel the level of classes is getting higher/tougher suddenly. I feel overwhelmed and challenged from assignments in week 3. &YOU GUYS TALK TOO FAST. (well, it surprisingly didn't affect to my understanding though). PLEASE! like myself, there are many many ESL students taking this course. I really don't think my English is poor (trust me, my undergraduate major is English lit and i wrote my final thesis for master's degree in ENGLISH as an ESL) but sometimes doing assignments and understanding lectures were challenging... Maybe that's because it takes time to get used to all the technical terms that has nothing to do with my major or career so far. But I think, not just JHU, but all the good universities providing courses need to consider ESL students who wanna learn more and pursue their dreams. Also it will be really great there are more ways to earn some degrees and more support for using the knowledge and skills I learned here for my career. (with reasonable price!) Thank you for the wonderful course, JHU! Hope I can go to JHU in US someday. | . Maybe that's because it takes | Time | to get used to all the | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I am very frustrated by the disconnect between the lectures and programming assignment in this course. The lectures are very basic, but that makes sense for an intro-type course. The programming assignments, however, have very little connection to the lectures. I have some experience using software with command-based interface (including R) for statistical analysis, and I am relatively good at searching and finding information independently, but this course was way too hard even for me. I might revisit programming assignments again once I have more time and more experience with the application, just for the sake of completing the course, but I kind of find it silly that I need experience with R to pass the course intended for people with little to no experience with R. | assignments again once I have more | Time | and more experience with the application, | Positive | 0.77 | 2.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very good introduction to programming with R. Surprisingly large amount of content for short period of time | of content for short period of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I rate this course as the beta-testing (not that I had completed this course prior the beta started). 1) the course is still very good with a lot of explanations and examples 2) I liked the part about debugging because we don't see often this topic when learning a new language. 3) I liked (but it's only a cosmetic thing) that all the slides have the same template/organization ; it's easier later when we looked back at the lessons to find what we search. 4) one (very) minor comment : I watched the videos with subtitles (english) and sometimes it also writes when the instructor thinks "loud", or repeat a word several times | , or repeat a word several | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Excellent course filled with real-life applications on how to increase a feeling of connectedness and joy. well presented, interactive, and applicable to anyone interested in psychology, neuroscience, or just basic wellness. Very worth the time. | just basic wellness. Very worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I just finished this course. I want to give a frank feedback since I see a lot of untapped possibilities in this course. On the strengths, it began with a high note and got me glued with expectations and promises. The instructor sounded extremely comfortable and confident with her subject, and had a very calming and pleasant presence which helped establish a kind of "remote" trust. On the improvement areas, I however have a few to list. For one, the intensity, rigour and to-the-pointedness of the content sharply fell after the first week. Having known about mindfulness, Metta meditations, gratitude, it became personally disappointing to me how this course conveyed so little about them and impacted so less than can be possible with the time and space alloted. The framework which initially looked hopeful is perhaps not the best framework, as much as is said about this not being "spectator course". Because this format diluted the intensity and possibility of the course, making it drag and bore towards the end. I wish there were guest interviews of more experienced academicians than what happened here as interviews from which there was little to learn. Honestly, this is my 4th of 5th course on positive psychology and this one will have to make many a fixes to any other that I've taken on coursera. The course ended and I find myself not a tad upbeater or nourished, or knowing something useful that I did not know already other than about vegas nerves which really did not make sense to end user who are here to know what and how to do things and feel better. | than can be possible with the | Time | and space alloted. The framework which | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I signed up for this course because I had read Martin Seligman's Learned Optimism and wanted to learn more about positive psychology. I would have liked this class to have gone more in depth in terms of the actual science and research involved (the studies Dr. Fredrickson refers to are for the most part only touched on briefly), and to have spent less time listening to the on-site students discussing their personal opinions (though I appreciated their insights, I would have liked to have learned more actual information). I did get something out of the experiential activities. Although they are optional, I would recommend doing them to really get something out of the class. They allowed me to stop and think about things I may not have made the time for otherwise. | briefly), and to have spent less | Time | listening to the on-site students discussing | Negative | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I signed up for this course because I had read Martin Seligman's Learned Optimism and wanted to learn more about positive psychology. I would have liked this class to have gone more in depth in terms of the actual science and research involved (the studies Dr. Fredrickson refers to are for the most part only touched on briefly), and to have spent less time listening to the on-site students discussing their personal opinions (though I appreciated their insights, I would have liked to have learned more actual information). I did get something out of the experiential activities. Although they are optional, I would recommend doing them to really get something out of the class. They allowed me to stop and think about things I may not have made the time for otherwise. | I may not have made the | Time | for otherwise. | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Thank you for such wonderful course! The time, I've spent with lessons of professor Barbara Fredrickson, was one of the best moments of my last years. I appreciate its practical side and good scientific experimental basis! | you for such wonderful course! The | Time | I've spent with lessons of professor | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | This is a nice and easy course. The chat sessions were fun and interesting. The professor got me interested enough to continue on to Tibetan Meditation because she touched on some related topics. She tried to make it a worthwhile experience, which it was. There were good interviews and good supplemental material. This was very worthwhile. Its a positive touch when course leaders take the time to dress well and make a good visual impression, as they would in a "real" physical classroom. I think that positive psychology could be a slippery topic, hard to substantiate in a way, but it was a door opener for me. I felt like this was a fine introduction to this area of psychology, which, if understood correctly, is beginning to blossom. | touch when course leaders take the | Time | to dress well and make a | Positive | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | It has been an excellent source of learning. I am taking the time to read the books that are recommended with the course thus the learning is richer. The formats used of video, supplemental reading, quiz etc are useful and spot on. Thanks | of learning. I am taking the | Time | to read the books that are | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Very thought provoking course with many real life implications and even put-into-practice course assignments. Something everyone should take the time to learn a little about. | assignments. Something everyone should take the | Time | to learn a little about. | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I think this is a vrey great course for all psychology lover because any one able to take a lot of information from this course in a very short time. | this course in a very short | Time | | Positive | 0.84 | 4.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Superficial treatment of the subject matter. Presentation was awkward and slow, and at times condescending in tone. This whole course is equivalent to a 2 hour seminar on "How to live more positively" presented at local community centre. It is not university level learning - instead it seems glib and lacking in substance. | was awkward and slow, and at | Time | condescending in tone. This whole course | Negative | 0.88 | 1.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Thoroughly enjoyed this course on many levels - it has boosted my academic, mental and physical health - which I really was not expecting. It was pleasurable, well laid out and delivered with thoroughly enjoyable, pleasant tasks. It was easy to fit the short lectures into my life and also easy and interesting to plough through it when I did have time to spend. I learned a lot that I can implement very, very easily. I shall be recommending this to many people. I 'feel a lot better for doing this course. I am interested to see how it plays out in my life over the next three months. Thank you Dr. Fredrickson. You were engaging and inspirational. I would love to do any other courses you may have in this format. | through it when I did have | Time | to spend. I learned a lot | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Dr. Barbra Fredrickson sheds light on a subject that is essential to the fulfillment of a well lived life. This is the good stuff. As I implement these simple practices into my everyday life I reap the rewards of energy, joy and closeness to others that is so often lacking in modern times. I highly recommended this course to everyone! | is so often lacking in modern | Time | I highly recommended this course to | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Professional, evidence-based. Nice arrangement with the four people. Beginning stunning, but at the end I sometimes had hard time with my attention:) Anyway - thank you, Barbara Fredrickson and all the people round the course, it was inspiring and pleasant. | the end I sometimes had hard | Time | with my attention:) Anyway - thank | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | its very basic stuff , and uses not optimal solutions to coding challenges , which might be okay for basics , for example the spelling check/suggestion project algorithm is probably exponential in time complexity . | project algorithm is probably exponential in | Time | complexity . | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The course does an OK (but not great) job at teaching Data Structures. And it does an OK (but not great) job at teaching Algorithm Performance/Optimization. The lectures and starter code could use some better integration. The assignments could be improved. They give you a bunch of code and ask you to complete it. This is kinda the way things work when you inherit a bunch of code, but its not how it works if you have to write it from scratch. This course has been taught many times, and the forums contained old posts, and they didn't seem as useful as in other courses I've taken. My main objective for this course was to continue learning Java, and it helped me do that, so I gave it 3 Stars. | This course has been taught many | Time | and the forums contained old posts, | Positive | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Great course! I learned a lot in very little time. | learned a lot in very little | Time | | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This course is a excellent introduction to data structures and algorithms for beginners. The lectures are extensive, complete and very helpful. The assignments are challenging and stimulating. The project is the construction of a text editor with check spelling, auto-correction, suggestion and more. It was the first time I felt involve in a large project, and you learn a little bit of software engineering too. This is the second course in the specialization and it overcomes the previous course in every aspect. I'll give five stars. The only thing I didn't like was the concept challenges, and not because of the challenges but because of the discussion with the UC San Diego learners. They are not beginners, they are actor pretending they don't know how to solve the problems when it is evident -at least it was my impression- that they are advanced students. I found them annoying and not helpful at all. | and more. It was the first | Time | I felt involve in a large | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I'm graduated in System Analysis, not Computer Sciences, and learned to program only by experience. After 20 years it's a good deal but still I missed the theoretical background and this always annoyed me. I knew and used to make good use of all the structures presented in this course but never could quite explain how or why, or talk in asymptotic notations. Now I can. I didn't stop here, I do take some topics to deep dive during the lectures. It's being a great experience and I only wish I could have more time to keep myself always enrolled in some course. | only wish I could have more | Time | to keep myself always enrolled in | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I can tell the tutors spent time on preparing the course. This is the most well-organized coursera course I took. | I can tell the tutors spent | Time | on preparing the course. This is | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This is one of the best series of courses I came along in online MOOC platform, such a brilliant course, this whole specialization is brilliant, such a interesting projects, I'm disappointed that I live in country that isn't that much wealthy to help this Specialization and to be able to do Capstone Project , but I wish all the best hope to finish all in time, this is in my top 3 online MOOC Courses and I saw a lot of them. I wish all the best to this team and people that made this possible. | best hope to finish all in | Time | this is in my top 3 | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I must admit that the assignments were more demanding than expected but overall this course is fabulous. The videos are extremely well done and Anne-Marie makes complicated points understandable for everyone, with lively and fun examples. Expect to spend some time on the written assignments (several research articles to study) if you want to completely take advantage of the course. | fun examples. Expect to spend some | Time | on the written assignments (several research | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Great course with great content!! I learnt a lot! But it takes much more time than 4-5h a week as is stated at course info. | lot! But it takes much more | Time | than 4-5h a week as is | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | It was a challenging course for someone that only knows quantitative research. Definitely took me more time than estimated (or proposed) | quantitative research. Definitely took me more | Time | than estimated (or proposed) | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | Lots of abstract concepts, really hard to Asian people. And the teacher's talking speed is a little fast. I have to watch the video for more than 4 times to make some sentences clearly. | the video for more than 4 | Time | to make some sentences clearly. | Negative | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | What can I say? Although it was a tough course but sometimes things were tough, it felt so incredibly fruitful each week. I think the main reason was because even though there were so many quizzes and the assignments which required so much time, they were carefully crafted in a way which helped build my abilities in a progressive manner. There was definitely a close alignment between instruction (video) and the assessments (quizzes/exams). You'll never be asked questions you weren't prepared to answer because of the aforesaid alignment. As I also work in a department which dabbles in educational research, I found the concepts thought in this course directly applicable to what's done in practice. Because the concepts were communicated so clearly, I could readily see examples of them in my everyday work! | the assignments which required so much | Time | they were carefully crafted in a | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I really enjoyed the course and I learned a great deal. The course design is thoughtful and well-carried-out. The illustrations are delightful! The instructor is obviously expert on the topic as well as in teaching and information is delivered very clearly. I will be building on this new knowledge for some time to come! | on this new knowledge for some | Time | to come! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | An excellent course! Quantitative methods are very well explained, starting from philosophical roots. I liked a lot the challenging tasks and peer review principal. By checking my peers' work I was able to learn several times more than from just going through the videos and completing my own work. I enjoyed the whole design of the course, including the professional illustrations and graphic design work. Great thanks to the whole team! | I was able to learn several | Time | more than from just going through | Positive | 0.76 | 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. | taken 99% of the course last | Time | but didn't have time to do | Negative | 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. | course last time, but didn't have | Time | to do the assignments or complete | Negative | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The first time I actually finished a coursera course! The course creators have obviously put a lot of time and effort into creating this course. The lectures extremely well done, the material and assignments are challenging but not impossible and the material is presented in such a way that even qualitative researchers like myself (no know for their passion for quantitative research) can get excited about the material! | The first | Time | I actually finished a coursera course! | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The first time I actually finished a coursera course! The course creators have obviously put a lot of time and effort into creating this course. The lectures extremely well done, the material and assignments are challenging but not impossible and the material is presented in such a way that even qualitative researchers like myself (no know for their passion for quantitative research) can get excited about the material! | have obviously put a lot of | Time | and effort into creating this course. | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| ru6DZ3Q6EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | I thoroughly enjoyed this course and would recommend it to anyone interested in evolution or paleontology. The course does an excellent job in picturing one of those truly revolutionary time periods in the history of animal life on Earth. The level of detail, pace, materials and visuals are just perfect. And the presenter does a top-notch job of delivering the material. Thanks to the University of Alberta and the team behind this great MOOC! | picturing one of those truly revolutionary | Time | periods in the history of animal | Positive | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| ru6DZ3Q6EeWi0g6YoSAL-w | I love all your online sources. I think the information is presented well and with logical questions to test the information. I like how the presenter was clearly knowledgeable and spoke with excitement. He was very engaging. The visuals are great. The fossils are great. The extra time and effort put into the materials is obvious. | The fossils are great. The extra | Time | and effort put into the materials | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| RUyctXVFEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Good course with details on certain topics. It will be better if we could have the slides presented for download for future reference. The amount of time the slides are show at times is insufficient to copy down all the notes. | for future reference. The amount of | Time | the slides are show at times | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| RUyctXVFEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Good course with details on certain topics. It will be better if we could have the slides presented for download for future reference. The amount of time the slides are show at times is insufficient to copy down all the notes. | time the slides are show at | Time | is insufficient to copy down all | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| s5sEkwAHEeW9ISIACxWDhA | Great Course. Enjoying it, expanding my knowledge and thinking. Taking my time and repeat most of the lectures. | my knowledge and thinking. Taking my | Time | and repeat most of the lectures. | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| s5sEkwAHEeW9ISIACxWDhA | I advice NOT to take this course. Why: the professor is never there to read your assignments. He leaves that totally to other students like yourself, to grade your written assignments, and, they do not read and give you a RANDOM grade in 2 seconds. Don't take it, you will waste sooo much time on this one. | it, you will waste sooo much | Time | on this one. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| s5sEkwAHEeW9ISIACxWDhA | This is an amazing course. I´m really happy. I had a really good time with the bibliography, the topics, and the teacher. ¡THAKS A LOT! | happy. I had a really good | Time | with the bibliography, the topics, and | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| s5sEkwAHEeW9ISIACxWDhA | My favourite MOOC of all time! Changed the way I viewed the world and introduced me to the wonderful new world of philosophy. Thank you Micheal S. Roth! :) | My favourite MOOC of all | Time | Changed the way I viewed the | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| s5sEkwAHEeW9ISIACxWDhA | THE most interesting lecturer I have found in recent times. Wonderfully enlightening approach to the subjec. Thank you | lecturer I have found in recent | Time | Wonderfully enlightening approach to the subjec. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| SAZf_ay2EeS5uiIACk-Zyg | Really enjoyed the course format, information presented and the videos were fantastic. The discussions were lively and interesting as well . Had a great time learning about what may be the next big disaster heading our way! | as well . Had a great | Time | learning about what may be the | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| sCE0nT-OEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Great course! Definitely worth your time if you put in the work. Crisis week alone was gold. | Great course! Definitely worth your | Time | if you put in the work. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Poor grading system. Based on 2 peers' "subjective" points of your week4 analysis assignment, even if you digested all the materials and received 100% on quizzes all weeks, you will have to repeat taking this course endlessly. At first I thought I did not analyze thoroughly so on my second session, I basically rewrote the whole assessment, followed by samples passed students gave me, also making sure I covered all the points the instruction asked me to cover, peer gives me 1 or 1.5 point for writing persona with little detail. I wrote 350 words persona, with stories and demographic of my target audience. Because I am 2.5 points short or so, I have to take this same course for the next round session for the third time, wait it it reaches week 4, resubmit my analysis that is now edited for 4 times. There is no clear guideline, format, or even sample provided, but the grades are left to the peers. Some pass with less than 300 word analysis with a lot of charts and pictures. I did as well but wasn't lucky at my first round so I developed 3 pg. analysis all in words to make it look like a true analytical report, didn't pass again. I do not know what this instructor is looking for as a form of assessment/analysis paper, and only those who are lucky enough to meet sensible peer graders pass. Waste of time, waste of money no one wants to spend lifetime to get a certificate especially when one knows what he or she is talking about. | next round session for the third | Time | wait it it reaches week 4, | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Poor grading system. Based on 2 peers' "subjective" points of your week4 analysis assignment, even if you digested all the materials and received 100% on quizzes all weeks, you will have to repeat taking this course endlessly. At first I thought I did not analyze thoroughly so on my second session, I basically rewrote the whole assessment, followed by samples passed students gave me, also making sure I covered all the points the instruction asked me to cover, peer gives me 1 or 1.5 point for writing persona with little detail. I wrote 350 words persona, with stories and demographic of my target audience. Because I am 2.5 points short or so, I have to take this same course for the next round session for the third time, wait it it reaches week 4, resubmit my analysis that is now edited for 4 times. There is no clear guideline, format, or even sample provided, but the grades are left to the peers. Some pass with less than 300 word analysis with a lot of charts and pictures. I did as well but wasn't lucky at my first round so I developed 3 pg. analysis all in words to make it look like a true analytical report, didn't pass again. I do not know what this instructor is looking for as a form of assessment/analysis paper, and only those who are lucky enough to meet sensible peer graders pass. Waste of time, waste of money no one wants to spend lifetime to get a certificate especially when one knows what he or she is talking about. | that is now edited for 4 | Time | There is no clear guideline, format, | Negative | 0.79 | 1.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Poor grading system. Based on 2 peers' "subjective" points of your week4 analysis assignment, even if you digested all the materials and received 100% on quizzes all weeks, you will have to repeat taking this course endlessly. At first I thought I did not analyze thoroughly so on my second session, I basically rewrote the whole assessment, followed by samples passed students gave me, also making sure I covered all the points the instruction asked me to cover, peer gives me 1 or 1.5 point for writing persona with little detail. I wrote 350 words persona, with stories and demographic of my target audience. Because I am 2.5 points short or so, I have to take this same course for the next round session for the third time, wait it it reaches week 4, resubmit my analysis that is now edited for 4 times. There is no clear guideline, format, or even sample provided, but the grades are left to the peers. Some pass with less than 300 word analysis with a lot of charts and pictures. I did as well but wasn't lucky at my first round so I developed 3 pg. analysis all in words to make it look like a true analytical report, didn't pass again. I do not know what this instructor is looking for as a form of assessment/analysis paper, and only those who are lucky enough to meet sensible peer graders pass. Waste of time, waste of money no one wants to spend lifetime to get a certificate especially when one knows what he or she is talking about. | sensible peer graders pass. Waste of | Time | waste of money no one wants | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Good, but too slow at times considering it is just a high level view of basics. Distractingly weird hand gestures. | Good, but too slow at | Time | considering it is just a high | Negative | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| shV98lfdEeWT8xIUiEQHHQ | The course provides a number of very useful tips for researchers, especially those whose first language is not English. There are a number of useful guides for new researchers to learn how to structure, phrase, and approach academic writing. However, there are also a few shortcomings of the course. Some of the material is overly subjective (giving rules for academic writing that are not necessarily applicable). Many of the assessment questions ask about issues which are either overly specific or simply incorrect (this is a very small percentage, but it is noticeable). The pace of the videos is also slow and oddly punctuated to the point that it can be difficult to follow at times. Finally, the course relies too heavily on academic writing for the hard sciences, rather than taking a broader approach, so some students may wish to keep this in mind when watching, as some advice may not be applicable to their own discipline. Overall, a recommended course for ESL academics, but could do with some improvement. | can be difficult to follow at | Time | Finally, the course relies too heavily | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| sK74dCWgEeW8-A6tkjXxWQ | This is one of the best management/leadership courses I have ever taken. The material is very creative and helps increase our attention span. My favorite part is learning from the additional resource/links posted (TED talks, youtube links, etc). They are very interesting and I learnt so much in so little time. Keep up the good work. | learnt so much in so little | Time | Keep up the good work. | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| sK74dCWgEeW8-A6tkjXxWQ | Upon the first few views of the subject material, presented in the form of dramatized episodes, I was skeptical if this course was worth its time. I was pleasantly surprised once we moved into motivation in the 21st century, and the course only improved from there (though the multiple long videos in the financial crisis module felt redundant). A meaningful course as long as you can engage yourself with the material rather than rely on their sub-par assignments and quizzes to engage you. I also, did not participate in any discussions, but perhaps if I had this course would have been rated 5 stars. | if this course was worth its | Time | I was pleasantly surprised once we | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| sK74dCWgEeW8-A6tkjXxWQ | This is the most awesome course! I love the videos before each module. The lecturers clearly put a lot of time and energy into the course content, which is so interesting. | lecturers clearly put a lot of | Time | and energy into the course content, | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| sNx-mzaXEeWa2g6sjqf03Q | The experience is great and relevant in very difficult times | great and relevant in very difficult | Time | | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I read some of the other reviews and feel I should comment on some of their criticisms. The material, objectives and tuition are top-notch. Yes there are things that are unclear and difficult and I you will need to read around the subjects introduced from other sources and persevere. But that is how you will learn and remember. So far I have yet to complete the course, I am about to start my 4th attempt, but I get a little further each time and the next presentation acts as revision initially. Daniel Eggar introduces key concepts that you need to master, this course is not spoon fed, but is better for it. If I have a criticism, perhaps the course is badly named, maybe it should be called "Core statistical concepts for data science using Excel" | I get a little further each | Time | and the next presentation acts as | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The explainations are a bit hard to follow if you are in a hurry, some times the course concepts just jump onto you. The techniques and content are really really great and very relavent, but the instructional value can be further ehnanced. | you are in a hurry, some | Time | the course concepts just jump onto | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I dislike this course because I have to complete so many assignment in one week. Instructions could have improved and slides could have improved rather than using chalkboard. Sorry there are a number of times I have to rewatch the videos and still dont understand. Hence I even have to place myself in another slot because I could not finish the assignment. Please improve on this module so that it is more enjoyable for learners who really want to learn. Thank you. | Sorry there are a number of | Time | I have to rewatch the videos | Negative | 0.67 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Though the Course name is Mastering Data Analysis in Excel. This course will take you beyond Excel mastering skills. Quite a Short Course compare to amount of Statistical and Probability concepts you learn. This course covers most of the concepts and models necessary for any Data Analyst & Data Science students and Professionals. This course is quite challenging and at times frustrating and time consuming but in the end you will feel you learnt something what you don't know. It will be worth your effort.If you don't know something what you don't know. Here is the course, it is an accelerated course. You many not master all of them, you will master some, I can assure any future students Professor will give all the information and concepts that you need to master. Even after completing the exam I keep repeating and going back to videos and notes which is really valuable. | course is quite challenging and at | Time | frustrating and time consuming but in | Positive | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Though the Course name is Mastering Data Analysis in Excel. This course will take you beyond Excel mastering skills. Quite a Short Course compare to amount of Statistical and Probability concepts you learn. This course covers most of the concepts and models necessary for any Data Analyst & Data Science students and Professionals. This course is quite challenging and at times frustrating and time consuming but in the end you will feel you learnt something what you don't know. It will be worth your effort.If you don't know something what you don't know. Here is the course, it is an accelerated course. You many not master all of them, you will master some, I can assure any future students Professor will give all the information and concepts that you need to master. Even after completing the exam I keep repeating and going back to videos and notes which is really valuable. | challenging and at times frustrating and | Time | consuming but in the end you | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The instructor should spend more time putting equations and concepts into concept, and tying them together. It often felt like values and questions were arbitrary. This is less about master data analysis in Excel, and more about gaining ground in a few key concepts, so the title is misleading as well. | The instructor should spend more | Time | putting equations and concepts into concept, | Negative | 0.69 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I did learn a few helpful tips for analyzing data with excel - particularly how to do a regression analysis in excel which is something I didn't know and is not intuitive. But for a course that is supposed to teach you how to analyze data in excel, there are actually very few lectures that actually show you how to do anything in excel. So much time is spent on how to calculate stuff by hand, without even mentioning how it translates to excel. Also the lectures have a lot of errors that were not corrected in a professional way. Just a random slide put in as an afterthought. The lectures got a bit disorganized towards the end, like the professor was in a rush and then forgot to relate everything to actual business analysis. The final project was especially difficult as not much was explained - I had to read the forums to figure out what I was actually supposed to do. | do anything in excel. So much | Time | is spent on how to calculate | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | PROS: - Classification lecture is good; -Weekly assignments are challenging enough CONS - No slides provided. Professor draws on an eletronic chalkboard (with a very bad handwriting) and you need to keep going back to videos when you are doing the homework. For me, this shows lack of professionalism and laziness - Some excel sheets are provided. But they are very messy and badly formatted, matching the messy handwriting in the videos. AND, the instructions are for MAC! No instructions for PC are provided whatsoever. I never used MAC, so I had a very hard time! - Very few examples real examples are provided; - You learn math concepts, not Excel skills! Except for the LINEST function, which is very handy, BUT it's NOT TAUGHT in the videos. I had to google the function to learn it. - They say to complete each piece of the final assingment after you finish the respective week related to that piece. But they only say that as you start week 6! - The course doesn't provide sufficient material for the final assignment. You get stuck without knowing how to get to answers; - Some answers to the final assignment are not correct, you check the answer sheet, and the results aren't present in the test! OVERALL: I'd never recommend this course to anyone. I only took it because I'm plannening to finish the specialization. I've taken several Online Courses (5+ on Excel), and this is the worst and most frustating one by far! | so I had a very hard | Time | - Very few examples real examples | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Constants errors in explanations, made you work very hard to complete it. We typically work hard, the organization of this course my you to suffer. You will go to learn a lot like I do. (Final Grade 91.4%). Learn in this course can be frustrating, they will push to the water, you will need to dedicate a lot of time discuss course material with fellow learners, mentors, and instructors to learn how to swim to save your life. | need to dedicate a lot of | Time | discuss course material with fellow learners, | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Really wanted to take this class. Unfortunately, I believe it is more about advanced statistics then excel. It was advertised as a beginners class and that is not the case. I recommend having a significant knowledge of statistics before taking this course. I'm a 15 year senior level accounting executive and I was easily spending 10 to 15 hours a week plus watching the videos 3 or 4 times each in order to understand the content. It was very difficult to understand. Disappointing. | watching the videos 3 or 4 | Time | each in order to understand the | Negative | 0.65 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The Course is fine, explanations and videos are a bit hard to follow at times. The final assessment is in my opinion very bad, as it i appears to me quite unrelated to the course it self. The lectures are quite abstract and the exam is a practical application of the concept. The instructions of the course also aren't very good as you need to do each part of the final project at the end of each week. I would strongly suggest to not take this course unless you have many spare hours. | a bit hard to follow at | Time | The final assessment is in my | Positive | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course really tortured me , but really worth the time and effort, I did learn something by heart :) | me , but really worth the | Time | and effort, I did learn something | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I am sorry to say this, but the tutorial could have been organzied in a much more serious way. I do not know how much time the Professors have put on preparation. But it gives me a "sloppy" impression!!! The class carries the name of University of Duke and 70 euros are charged, so I think the learners would reasonably expect to see that the teacher puts lots of time to organize the course structure, in order to efficiently give as much as information to the learners within limited time! For example, I believe nobody would not say that the Week 2 content on confusion matrix is very consistently explained. And this is just one example. | I do not know how much | Time | the Professors have put on preparation. | Negative | 0.96 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I am sorry to say this, but the tutorial could have been organzied in a much more serious way. I do not know how much time the Professors have put on preparation. But it gives me a "sloppy" impression!!! The class carries the name of University of Duke and 70 euros are charged, so I think the learners would reasonably expect to see that the teacher puts lots of time to organize the course structure, in order to efficiently give as much as information to the learners within limited time! For example, I believe nobody would not say that the Week 2 content on confusion matrix is very consistently explained. And this is just one example. | that the teacher puts lots of | Time | to organize the course structure, in | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I am sorry to say this, but the tutorial could have been organzied in a much more serious way. I do not know how much time the Professors have put on preparation. But it gives me a "sloppy" impression!!! The class carries the name of University of Duke and 70 euros are charged, so I think the learners would reasonably expect to see that the teacher puts lots of time to organize the course structure, in order to efficiently give as much as information to the learners within limited time! For example, I believe nobody would not say that the Week 2 content on confusion matrix is very consistently explained. And this is just one example. | information to the learners within limited | Time | For example, I believe nobody would | Positive | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | In light of R or Python, doing statistical computing in excel is really time consuming and backward. The instruction might be OK, but I lost interest beginning of week 2 seeing how he build binary decision model in excel. | statistical computing in excel is really | Time | consuming and backward. The instruction might | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Frankly speaking, this course is a little bit hard for me although I have studied them during my master programs. There are many formulas in the course and hardly to remember in short time. I had to review the videos several times. I'd like to recommend the professor may summarize such fomulas in one page so it's more easy to students to catch up the course. | and hardly to remember in short | Time | I had to review the videos | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Frankly speaking, this course is a little bit hard for me although I have studied them during my master programs. There are many formulas in the course and hardly to remember in short time. I had to review the videos several times. I'd like to recommend the professor may summarize such fomulas in one page so it's more easy to students to catch up the course. | had to review the videos several | Time | I'd like to recommend the professor | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I found this course too advanced for my level of familiarity with statistics. Its true that most basic stuff is covered to be fair, but the progression is very rapid. As I work long hours and other commitments I didn't have enough time to dedicate to study beyond the time needed just for this course. If I had been able to study an extra 10 hours a week practicing using the formulas then I'm sure I would have got more out of it. | other commitments I didn't have enough | Time | to dedicate to study beyond the | Negative | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I found this course too advanced for my level of familiarity with statistics. Its true that most basic stuff is covered to be fair, but the progression is very rapid. As I work long hours and other commitments I didn't have enough time to dedicate to study beyond the time needed just for this course. If I had been able to study an extra 10 hours a week practicing using the formulas then I'm sure I would have got more out of it. | to dedicate to study beyond the | Time | needed just for this course. If | Negative | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Complex concepts (e.g., regression), which cannot be taught in such a short course format (I know from extensive prior training), are taught here in an arcane way. I don't know how students without prior knowledge on these topics (e.g., regression, ROC curve analysis) could possibly understand this when taught this way. Course is also in an 'early draft' mode, with plenty of mistakes in the videos/slides. The course (and specialization) really tarnishes - instead of enhancing - this institution's outside image and reputation. Really a deception; sorry I took this class and specialization, a complete waste of my time and money. The initial presentation was misleading (and I have found online many people sharing the same feeling). | specialization, a complete waste of my | Time | and money. The initial presentation was | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Videos fine. Quizes impossible to understand unless you take previous courses and have time to go through forums and more extra staff. It takes a lot of time. Not suggested unless you have it. | you take previous courses and have | Time | to go through forums and more | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Videos fine. Quizes impossible to understand unless you take previous courses and have time to go through forums and more extra staff. It takes a lot of time. Not suggested unless you have it. | staff. It takes a lot of | Time | Not suggested unless you have it. | Negative | 0.92 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Much work needs to be done on this course to make it friendly to learners. The quizzes and assignments do not align with what is taught in the lessons. Further, the content in the lessons does not even show or explain what is expected from the learning. I spent the majority of my time exploring the discussions to discover what I was supposed to be doing and the rest of it on Google teaching myself the concepts that were not taught in the course. | I spent the majority of my | Time | exploring the discussions to discover what | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Tackling complex subject in a short time span. | Tackling complex subject in a short | Time | span. | Positive | 0.77 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | They have a lot of good material. It will probably be better the second time around. | will probably be better the second | Time | around. | Negative | 0.66 | 3.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It has a lot of problems, including: Not so many lectures about excel itself - most of the time you will be watching videos about statistic methods. The lectures are very superficial, even though the quizzes and projects demand a lot of knowledge and time. The course seems to have a staff of one man: the professor of the course rarely replies (even though he did at the beginning of the session) and all the work seems to be done by his assistant, who tries his best, but ends up not coping with all the questions asked at the discussion forums. | excel itself - most of the | Time | you will be watching videos about | Positive | 0.69 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It has a lot of problems, including: Not so many lectures about excel itself - most of the time you will be watching videos about statistic methods. The lectures are very superficial, even though the quizzes and projects demand a lot of knowledge and time. The course seems to have a staff of one man: the professor of the course rarely replies (even though he did at the beginning of the session) and all the work seems to be done by his assistant, who tries his best, but ends up not coping with all the questions asked at the discussion forums. | demand a lot of knowledge and | Time | The course seems to have a | Negative | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | So many equations presented without explaining why these things work or how they are derived. I'm having a hard time seeing the relevance. Also, I learned a lot of these statistics in college and the explanations provided in these lessons actually confused me about things I already know. Very disappointed in this course. Especially since part 1 of the specialization was so good. | are derived. I'm having a hard | Time | seeing the relevance. Also, I learned | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | A very good COURSE....i was looking it sinc a long time thank you COURSERA | was looking it sinc a long | Time | thank you COURSERA | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| SpWNUyTfEeWxbhIkPfddLQ | A course offering very accessible, clear introduction to the concept of programming seen as a network of algorithms, supplanted with a myriad of real-life examples. It then introduced a comely intuitive software, developed by MIT - Scratch, which enables you to practically start creating animations and thus programming. Even though i'm not a fluent hispano-hablante, just the knowledge of English and some classical culture should make it possible for you to follow. At the same time, should that be too complicated, there should be subtitles/English language version to all the videos and of all other materials. Have NOT tried that though. | you to follow. At the same | Time | should that be too complicated, there | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| sQB40x47EeWS6wrbVw_uEw | Really good. Worth the time invested double. | Really good. Worth the | Time | invested double. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| sQB40x47EeWS6wrbVw_uEw | Thank you very much Juan, for your time and dedication! You really inspired me to take the path to research in the medical field! I never have had such a high standard course in clinical research! Thanks very much, I feel proud to have had the chance to be one of your students. | you very much Juan, for your | Time | and dedication! You really inspired me | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| SrM6V-3pEeSJZSIAC0gHUg | Good course, interesting theory, opens up a new thinking process for planning classes. The dual purpose classes, i.e. content plus the development of some of those characters strengths discussed in the course will certainly be much more problematic than presented; also the evaluation of character strengths will certainly be problematic for some time to come, but the course is till worth taking. | will certainly be problematic for some | Time | to come, but the course is | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| SrM6V-3pEeSJZSIAC0gHUg | This is one of the best, most useful courses I have taken in a long time. | I have taken in a long | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| svzDI2FSEeW6DxKCi866Kw | Rewarding experience for the time invested!!!! | Rewarding experience for the | Time | invested! ! ! ! | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I almost need to come back and listen to these lectures again. This course is pretty technical -- it involves several different digital tools. I found that it was possible to do well on the quizzes without really mastering the technical tools. Now that I'm trying to put them into use more fully, I find I don't understand them as well as I should have. I take responsibility for perhaps not pushing to understand the first time -- but I also encourage Coursera and @RandyHlavac to perhaps include something more than "did you get an account?" checks for the tools -- to make sure students grasp how to use the tools before they move on. | not pushing to understand the first | Time | -- but I also encourage Coursera | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I found the course useful to better ground and assimilate the ideas presented in the first one. But on the other hand, as mentioned by other learners, I do find it a little too much on the commercial side. I did find very interesting to learn to use some of the tools such as Klout. I think that in time, and working in the Social Media department of a company, I would get the chance to see the interest of Lexalytics but I DID NOT understand anything related to Bluemix... I felt it was superfluous in this course. All in all, I did appreciate the course as it made me think more deeply about my goals, but I'm not entirely sure it was worth the €71. I feel it could have been shortened a tad bit and go more to the point. I do look forward to the next course though as I am learning a great deal no matter what :) | as Klout. I think that in | Time | and working in the Social Media | Positive | 0.74 | 3.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | Using MOOC 2, I was really hoping we would go more in depth on (free) tools like Google Analytics. I would have liked information on how to better utilize the information I get from Twitter, Pinterest, and Facebook's built in analytics tools as well. I know I'm under-utilizing them at present, and there's good stuff there. In spite of claims to the contrary, the Lexalytics and IBM Bluemix videos did feel like extended infomercials. Moreover, I work for a small non-profit, and we have neither the funds or bandwidth to utilize programs like this. I think the time could have been better used doing a deeper dive with Klout and SocialMention. I'm working on the assignment now and feel like we barely scraped the surface with both of these programs. There are just too many tools being introduced in this MOOC, and not enough practical learning. Tools are fantastic, but it's important to be utilizing them properly, otherwise I end up feeling like I'm wasting time. | programs like this. I think the | Time | could have been better used doing | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | Using MOOC 2, I was really hoping we would go more in depth on (free) tools like Google Analytics. I would have liked information on how to better utilize the information I get from Twitter, Pinterest, and Facebook's built in analytics tools as well. I know I'm under-utilizing them at present, and there's good stuff there. In spite of claims to the contrary, the Lexalytics and IBM Bluemix videos did feel like extended infomercials. Moreover, I work for a small non-profit, and we have neither the funds or bandwidth to utilize programs like this. I think the time could have been better used doing a deeper dive with Klout and SocialMention. I'm working on the assignment now and feel like we barely scraped the surface with both of these programs. There are just too many tools being introduced in this MOOC, and not enough practical learning. Tools are fantastic, but it's important to be utilizing them properly, otherwise I end up feeling like I'm wasting time. | end up feeling like I'm wasting | Time | | Negative | 0.98 | 2.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I liked this course, but there is room for improvement. For the assignment where you list keywords and hashtags associated with your target audience using Social Mention, the keyword results are only as good as the search term you use. And there was not much guidance on how to determine that search term. For instance, my target market is comprised of sales and marketing managers in corporate and creative environments. What should I search for to find out what they are talking about? I truly don't know. I took a guess and completed the assignment, but it would be helpful to understand the strategy for using social mention successfully. Secondly, the IBM Blue Mix section did not work. I signed up (using my Coursera email) but never received a confirmation email. I checked my spam folder. I created a support ticket through IBM and received support emails, but never got the confirmation email. They re-sent it several times but it never came through. Viewing the discussions, I was not the only one this happened to. And I had stopped watching the videos because I thought I needed that access to finish the course. Getting that straightened out would be a huge improvement. | confirmation email. They re-sent it several | Time | but it never came through. Viewing | Positive | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I found it was very interesting, for sure, but maybe too focused some times. Also, it seems good for listening to twitter, for example, but not other social medias that could be much more interesting in different situations. | sure, but maybe too focused some | Time | Also, it seems good for listening | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I liked the assignment, and the course... for the most part. What I didn't care for was so much time being spent on the IBM BlueMix and other software tutorials. I don't really see the value in those software, and it felt very sales pitch-y. I can't imagine using them in my day to day, so it just felt like a waste of time. But I did like all other aspects of this course, including the Taco Bell insight, as well as the details on Social Mention and the other free web applications that is more pertinent to future social work. | didn't care for was so much | Time | being spent on the IBM BlueMix | Negative | 0.86 | 3.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I liked the assignment, and the course... for the most part. What I didn't care for was so much time being spent on the IBM BlueMix and other software tutorials. I don't really see the value in those software, and it felt very sales pitch-y. I can't imagine using them in my day to day, so it just felt like a waste of time. But I did like all other aspects of this course, including the Taco Bell insight, as well as the details on Social Mention and the other free web applications that is more pertinent to future social work. | just felt like a waste of | Time | But I did like all other | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| t1gZRTXyEeW6RApRXdjJPw | I found the monitoring tools a bit difficult to grasp in the time frame. | bit difficult to grasp in the | Time | frame. | Positive | 0.74 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Great experience. It's not so time consuming. Love it ! | Great experience. It's not so | Time | consuming. Love it ! | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Exercises should be better designed and I think that first week of this course and the whole previous one are too basic. They could be assumed for 99% of people and I think it would be a good idea to create an optional preparation module containing them. That would save time and perhaps open opportunities for more advanced material to be included. | module containing them. That would save | Time | and perhaps open opportunities for more | Negative | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecturer was very slow, and some things were not explained very well (while very simple concepts were often over-explained). Also, I'm quite sure there were at least 2 errors in the weekly quizzes. One that comes to mind is a question that had identical options for two of the multiple-choice answers, but only one of them was correct (50/50 guess, more or less --- I had to take the quiz 3 times before I guessed right!). | had to take the quiz 3 | Time | before I guessed right! ). | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | the last course module. There were | Time | when I questioned my own sanity | Positive | 0.63 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course was very average to me. Compared to the first course in the specialization, Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling, which was absolutely great. What I liked: Good info on the tools in excel that are needed. What I didn't like: Time spent on content that necessarily wasn't regarding models; the critical material was buried in videos and was very brief. More time should have been spent. Additionally the quiz questions were subjective at times based on what was said on video and the formula answers weren't correctly graded in many cases. This course could have been much better, maybe I was just spoiled by the first course. | are needed. What I didn't like: | Time | spent on content that necessarily wasn't | Negative | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course was very average to me. Compared to the first course in the specialization, Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling, which was absolutely great. What I liked: Good info on the tools in excel that are needed. What I didn't like: Time spent on content that necessarily wasn't regarding models; the critical material was buried in videos and was very brief. More time should have been spent. Additionally the quiz questions were subjective at times based on what was said on video and the formula answers weren't correctly graded in many cases. This course could have been much better, maybe I was just spoiled by the first course. | videos and was very brief. More | Time | should have been spent. Additionally the | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course was very average to me. Compared to the first course in the specialization, Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling, which was absolutely great. What I liked: Good info on the tools in excel that are needed. What I didn't like: Time spent on content that necessarily wasn't regarding models; the critical material was buried in videos and was very brief. More time should have been spent. Additionally the quiz questions were subjective at times based on what was said on video and the formula answers weren't correctly graded in many cases. This course could have been much better, maybe I was just spoiled by the first course. | the quiz questions were subjective at | Time | based on what was said on | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | It seems to me like the course could have like 2 or 3 times more video concerning tasks required | could have like 2 or 3 | Time | more video concerning tasks required | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| tCC8OzJzEeWLGgqjU3pHlw | A very interesting experience. I got imagination level-up. Though it was really difficult to understand what should you do in each assignment. I've spent quite a while time to realize what to do each time. And some students did their homework completely wrong. But except of that it's a great course. | assignment. I've spent quite a while | Time | to realize what to do each | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| tCC8OzJzEeWLGgqjU3pHlw | A very interesting experience. I got imagination level-up. Though it was really difficult to understand what should you do in each assignment. I've spent quite a while time to realize what to do each time. And some students did their homework completely wrong. But except of that it's a great course. | to realize what to do each | Time | And some students did their homework | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| tCC8OzJzEeWLGgqjU3pHlw | For the first course, you will only be drawing. You will not learn anything about programming video games. It was nice that they showed famous artists for cartoons, but the videos felt too long, with dialogues that felt like rambling at times. | dialogues that felt like rambling at | Time | | Negative | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 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! | idea I've had jotted down some | Time | ago and I've found them to | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| tCC8OzJzEeWLGgqjU3pHlw | Lots of fun to join in and nice easy pace to complete the assignments. Overall had an awesome time participating! | the assignments. Overall had an awesome | Time | participating! | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| tEqImn2kEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Great introduction to Pro Tools even for the seasoned amatuer who's been playing around with DAWs. I now have basic skills with Pro Tools, plus my editing and mixing skills have improved. This course won't make you a pro but it's a great introduction and well worth your time if you're a newbie or have stalled in your amatuer persuits. **thumbs up** | great introduction and well worth your | Time | if you're a newbie or have | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| tGbJuel4EeSnMSIACzuFJw | totally worth money and time | totally worth money and | Time | | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| tGbJuel4EeSnMSIACzuFJw | Full of tools based on hands-on experience from some very smart people - fun, challenging with so much wisdom collected in one place. Couldn't have spend my precious time in a more rewarding way, thank you | place. Couldn't have spend my precious | Time | in a more rewarding way, thank | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| tGbJuel4EeSnMSIACzuFJw | Great Teacher. Great examples. Only issue i did not like what that you had to find a partner to negotiate with and I found it a bit difficult to find people in my time zone who spoke good English. Other than that it was a great course and I recommend it for any one who want to go into business, law or retail management | difficult to find people in my | Time | zone who spoke good English. Other | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| tGbJuel4EeSnMSIACzuFJw | Extraordinary Course with an excited lecturing team behind it! Have done some courses here, but none of them had so much content and sophisticated teaching methods and cool guests. The only star that's missing is that the system for finding negotiation partners could be optimized. Overall, was worth the time!!! | be optimized. Overall, was worth the | Time | ! ! | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| tGbJuel4EeSnMSIACzuFJw | Beautiful made lecture. (Be so kind to excuse my miserable English. It is still under construction) After I had to change my proficiency, from being a truck driver to a total different job type by doing sales on telephone, my new boss (new and different company) urged me. She urged me, to invest in my private time learning how to make money on the phone. Instead of irritating potential customers by doing weird offers. After a good while of understanding, why is the other side willing to invest in products, my wage is remarkably higher. By compare of some weeks before. I understand also, to invest in ideas which are worth to pay for. And I started with one bought book to learn "Game Theory 101: The Complete Textbook". The other two books are introduced by Prof. Barry Nielbuff. Yes, my QUIZZ-answers are WRONG. Nevertheless I learn what is going on. And that helps me doing a much better job. With great fun. Just want to say ... ... Thank you all. | me, to invest in my private | Time | learning how to make money on | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | This online course is very helpful especially for those who do not have enough time to go to a traditional class like me. :D | those who do not have enough | Time | to go to a traditional class | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Great resources. I am already using these ideas in my language classes. A great resouce to keep coming to time and time again. | great resouce to keep coming to | Time | and time again. | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Great resources. I am already using these ideas in my language classes. A great resouce to keep coming to time and time again. | to keep coming to time and | Time | again. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I like this course a lot, since it seems to be there for me every time i need help with my lessons. Thank you for ASU! | to be there for me every | Time | i need help with my lessons. | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Getting so much out of these courses. I usually lose my motivation for on-line learning after the first couple of weeks, or when my schedule starts to get in the way. But I MAKE time for this course. Thank you for your creativity and succinct videos. | in the way. But I MAKE | Time | for this course. Thank you for | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | The course is worthwhile and enjoyable at the same time. Very inspiring! | worthwhile and enjoyable at the same | Time | Very inspiring! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I am enjoying this course very much! Worth time in it. | enjoying this course very much! Worth | Time | in it. | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I love these courses. I think they quickly and creatively relay information. I learn what I need without it taking too much time. Plus, it was just put together really well! | need without it taking too much | Time | Plus, it was just put together | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | This is an amazing course, I had been looking for a long time. I finally found it and seems like it's tailor made for me! | had been looking for a long | Time | I finally found it and seems | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Really fruitful teaching techniques are being used in this courses. Thanks to the course presenters for allocating a lot of effort and time to provide us with a unique experience | allocating a lot of effort and | Time | to provide us with a unique | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I liked the course and I found it useful . I will recommend it to my friends. However , some of the instructions are not clear. I understood that I have time to catch up till Dec 21st. But now, My assignment and editing are not accepted and I want to know what I can do. | clear. I understood that I have | Time | to catch up till Dec 21st. | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| TIDJWBwuEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I thoroughly enjoyed taking this class! I would recommend it to anyone interested in getting certified. Totally worth the time :-) | in getting certified. Totally worth the | Time | :-) | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This course is very informative. I was surprised how many pieces there are to the financial puzzle. I found the suggested reading material to be interesting and enlightening too. I plan to gradually read all of the books that I have not yet read. The professor delivered the lectures in a clear and concise manner. This has been time well spent. Thank you. | and concise manner. This has been | Time | well spent. Thank you. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Very insightful and useful, particularly for someone whose limited knowledge and time to read papers and books about global financial crisis in 2007-2008. | for someone whose limited knowledge and | Time | to read papers and books about | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This course gives an easy to understand and detailed look at what happened during the financial crises. The material is very detailed and contains charts, quotes from the time and some personal experiences. | and contains charts, quotes from the | Time | and some personal experiences. | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Very informative and engaging course. Very good lecture presentations by two leading subject matter experts. About the only drawback was the lack of teaching assistance interaction on the course discussion forums and maybe even an occasional drop in by one of the instructors from time to time. | by one of the instructors from | Time | to time. | Positive | 0.71 | 4.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Very informative and engaging course. Very good lecture presentations by two leading subject matter experts. About the only drawback was the lack of teaching assistance interaction on the course discussion forums and maybe even an occasional drop in by one of the instructors from time to time. | of the instructors from time to | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Some good information but very much a political course, not much of an economics course. Stating, as if it is a given, late in the course, that there are times when it is okay to introduce a moral hazard. Erroneously defining fiat money early in the course. Stating, again as if it were a given, that deficit spending is naturally the right answer to a crisis. When politicians and their pawns develop a course should we be surprised that the answer is always more government intervention? Oh, if only we had more tools to stop this, never realizing their role in creating the crisis. | in the course, that there are | Time | when it is okay to introduce | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Explains thoroughly the cause of the Financial crisis, contagion and prevention. Touches on the Euro zone crisis and the problems with single currency for member nations. The course parallels a documentary but at the same time elucidates on various fragments leading to the crisis | a documentary but at the same | Time | elucidates on various fragments leading to | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Good fundamental summary of the GFC. Worth the time. | summary of the GFC. Worth the | Time | | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| tKpNgsa4EeWg0QoHq3JjoQ | Professor Roderick Bates is a fantastic lecturer. It is my first time back at school in 23 years and I followed his classes with ease. Highly recommended course for everyone. | fantastic lecturer. It is my first | Time | back at school in 23 years | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| TN2PygiBEeW4diIACwKO-g | Excellent course! As close as it comes to a course on the meaning of life. I've learned so much and loved every minute. This course has helped me to know myself a lot better, and to understand others, and the human condition in general. I feel as if it's also helped me to solve a couple of life's great mysteries, and at the same time introduced me to a lot more great unsolved mysteries. Everyone should do this course (all three modules)! | great mysteries, and at the same | Time | introduced me to a lot more | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| TN2PygiBEeW4diIACwKO-g | I really hate to see the course end. It has been an interesting journey. I wish to thank all of those connected - Corrsera, Ruthers, Professors Daniel Ogilvie and Leonard Hamilton, and all the guest speakers for this great course presentation. It was well introduced, assembled, staged and orchestrated. It's about time such subject matter that has such a profound effect on societies and peoples lives be analyzed. | assembled, staged and orchestrated. It's about | Time | such subject matter that has such | Positive | 0.78 | 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. | material. However, it can take some | Time | to have assignments marked by peers. | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| towthzydEeW0tw4knrMo3Q | This is a truly brilliant course that shines a light on the dark world of the biofilm. The lecturers are excellent in bringing a quite difficult subject alive. The course introduces the secrets of bacteria to us and how they change from a simple infection to a long term (some times) debilitating chronic infections such a sinusitis and artificial knee joint infections. I found it fascinating that these simple organisms were clever enough dodge the bodies considerable defences and then join with others to form biofilms - which are like little communities working together with the aim of a bodily take over. Quite fascinating!! Furthermore - the lecturers introduce the idea of antibiotics and how they work to push these little invaders back!! Enjoy and learn | infection to a long term (some | Time | debilitating chronic infections such a sinusitis | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| TpvXIzxZEeWjyxInT4zYJQ | PROS Great explanations by the instructor. Easy to understand course- with real world examples. CONS Pacing was too slow. Too simple and easy for the 5 weeks of coursework in my opinion. Several harder concepts could be covered in the time that the course ran. Problems were also very simple and not very challenging. | concepts could be covered in the | Time | that the course ran. Problems were | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| TpvXIzxZEeWjyxInT4zYJQ | This course is worth learning. I like this course as It is really applicable, very well prepared, the ideas are presented in a clear way. I would definitely choose this course again (and recommend to my friends), despite the fact that I had to spend really a lot more time, than on other coursera courses, i.e. ~3-6 hours studying the material. | to spend really a lot more | Time | than on other coursera courses, i. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | This course seems to require a high level of foundation knowledge that I don't have. I had to leave the course before completion because of that. In fact, most of the videos were too complex to understand without prior knowledge on the matter and the deadlines are quite tight to have time to research all the topics. I believe the course content is quite interesting; but too complicated. I would appreciate less text and abstract drawings on the slide, maybe an intro with images (maybe 3D) of the human body to give a little bit of background on what's going to be discussed in the class... | deadlines are quite tight to have | Time | to research all the topics. I | Positive | 0.8 | 3.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | Some of the final exams included information that was not in the lectures, so there were a few times I felt the need to refer to outside sources just to pass a lecture. I have no previous medical knowledge or training, so this course may be better suited for someone who is a pre-med student and at least understands some of wha | lectures, so there were a few | Time | I felt the need to refer | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | Very informative. I just wish I had more time to immerse myself into the material | I just wish I had more | Time | to immerse myself into the material | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | This is one of the best courses. I really enjoyed taking this class again. this class is not easy. you do have to put in the time and effort to study the material and it is well worth your effort. thank you for pulling this all together and teaching me! | do have to put in the | Time | and effort to study the material | Negative | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | I should have started with the course Learning How to Learn first before I even started with this Introductory Human Physiology course because It would have better prepared me to understand the course better and be able to finish the course on time. It looks like I will need to really study this course slowly at my own phase by not being concerned and bothered by any deadline. Thanks and congratulation to the Professors responsible for putting up together complex course on line and FREE at that. | able to finish the course on | Time | It looks like I will need | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| Tr9rK6JtEeSwKiIACiONVg | i loved this course i loved the instructors i enjoyed the time here Basem Saleh "BA" | loved the instructors i enjoyed the | Time | here Basem Saleh " BA" | Positive | 1.0 | 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. | peer review was a waste of | Time | some individuals submit whatever other review | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| trDN9vgGEeSW1SIAC3oCCQ | Though but its well worth the time. | Though but its well worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| trgWdYiKEeWfngrMqWa91Q | The lectures were not very interesting or instructive. The reading materials were much more so. However, the assignments in the class were based much more on the lectures and on self-reflection than on the materials. I learned a little bit, and as such found the course worth the time I put into it, but I almost think one could get through this course with little difficulty without reading any of the written materials, and thus derive very little benefit from it. I would encourage the makers of this course to do a significant revamping. (In addition to greater incorporation and emphasis on the written materials, I think more real-life examples of diplomatic successes and failures would be a far more effective and entertaining use of the lecture time than the esoteric philosophising that seems to characterize it in this edition.) | such found the course worth the | Time | I put into it, but I | Positive | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| trgWdYiKEeWfngrMqWa91Q | The lectures were not very interesting or instructive. The reading materials were much more so. However, the assignments in the class were based much more on the lectures and on self-reflection than on the materials. I learned a little bit, and as such found the course worth the time I put into it, but I almost think one could get through this course with little difficulty without reading any of the written materials, and thus derive very little benefit from it. I would encourage the makers of this course to do a significant revamping. (In addition to greater incorporation and emphasis on the written materials, I think more real-life examples of diplomatic successes and failures would be a far more effective and entertaining use of the lecture time than the esoteric philosophising that seems to characterize it in this edition.) | and entertaining use of the lecture | Time | than the esoteric philosophising that seems | Positive | 0.89 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I had some issues with this course which is why I rated it a 2. First off, let me start by saying this is a very good overview of what the Cybersecurity Terms are, but I wish it went deeper into the subject. 1. Having to pay just to take the quizzes for an overview course is kind of a joke. I could see asking for money if you went into more detail information regarding each lesson, but just telling me what each term means and then pointing me to a website, then asking for 50 bucks is kind of cheap considering no in-depth information was ever given. 2. Why did you have all of those people that are in the field of cybersecurity just read off a list of terms? You could have done that, kind of a waste of time for those other people. I am guessing that you had to pay them. Which would explain why you are asking 50 dollars just to take the quizzes. 3. Where was the real life experience? Explain to me the most common mistakes people make with each of the different type of networks as securities. That would at least be worth 50 dollars, for some real world practical use. I could have easily googled these terms and have in the past. I thought it would contain more detailed information about the subject considering is technically an online course. | that, kind of a waste of | Time | for those other people. I am | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I DON'T recommend this course AT ALL. This college doesn't spend much effort to structure this course - just putting short videos (less than 10mins in total per a week) and external references (which someone else wrote). The assignments are just open discussion among students and have ourselves evaluate with each other. I haven't learn anything from this course. It's just a waste of time and money. Coursera should inspect this course otherwise these skeptical courses can deteriorate the reputation of this MOOC platform - I love the other courses/specializations provided by other universities though, | course. It's just a waste of | Time | and money. Coursera should inspect this | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 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. | I wish they spent more | Time | on the content of videos and | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I Felt like this was a very in depth course, the reading material was very good. At times I thought the instructional videos were very short - I would have liked them to have been longer, perhaps going into more depth about some of the topics covered in the reading materials - I was not fond of the written portion of the course - I would have preferred exams to the written portion. thanks. | reading material was very good. At | Time | I thought the instructional videos were | Positive | 0.81 | 3.0 |
| 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. | me in the right direction every | Time | Sometimes, by the end of the | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I find this course very informative, but at the same time the videos seem pointless. All the quizzes are on the suggested reading material. The videos are quite cursory- almost an afterthought. | very informative, but at the same | Time | the videos seem pointless. All the | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The content of the videos are just some engineer citing with some brief headline of security, it's lacking of depth and explanation, totally wasting my time !! | depth and explanation, totally wasting my | Time | ! ! | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Its very excellent teaching method. short time more information. | Its very excellent teaching method. short | Time | more information. | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Extremely well done videos, Professor Sachs is articulate and clear. The videos are a bit lengthy 25 minutes each so this asks quite some time investment. The quiz are not easy, one must often look up charts and work with various statistical methods which were not always easy to manage - hence the 4 instead of 5. However this does force one into mining world organizations for data so overall it's a good learning process. It never fails to amaze me how much data we have collected globally and for so long! | each so this asks quite some | Time | investment. The quiz are not easy, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | The course itself is excellent. I just wished they got rid of the zooming in on graphs. Also, there is some issues with making the quizzes depend on web links that change over time. | on web links that change over | Time | | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This is an exceptional course and I would like to thank both Professor Sachs and Coursera for offering it! It is both a pleasure and an honor to have been able to learn so much and a limited period of time. | much and a limited period of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | The Age of Sustainable Development is by far the most informative course I have encountered on the complex and pertinent subject of sustainable development. Professor Sachs takes the time to fully explore many of the key themes that form the foundations of sustainable development and simplifies sophisticated topics into digestible pieces of insight. This course is a must for anyone involved in sustainable development and should be prescribed viewing for politicians, CEOs and future leaders. | sustainable development. Professor Sachs takes the | Time | to fully explore many of the | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Excellent programme. Basic introduction of concepts like Gross Domestic Product and Purchasing Power Parity, presented in a relaxed way along with video footage. Definitely worth your time. | with video footage. Definitely worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Absolutely wonderful. The Universidad de Columbia and especially professor Jeffrey Sachs made an amazing revision of the history, the data and the concepts of Sustainable Development, as the biggest ideas, the biggest challenge of our time. Interesting, compressible, interactive, this was a great experience for me and I´m sure for everyone. | ideas, the biggest challenge of our | Time | Interesting, compressible, interactive, this was a | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Overall, the course is outstanding, bringing together diverse threads of Global Health, Climate Change, Economics, International Politics/Relations and more into a cohesive explanation of our current world challenges standing in the way of living together on this planet for a long time to come without our current inequalities and threats to life itself. I've recommended it to all my friends and colleagues and I recommend it to anyone who reads my review. It's a time investment, but well worth every second I spent. | on this planet for a long | Time | to come without our current inequalities | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Overall, the course is outstanding, bringing together diverse threads of Global Health, Climate Change, Economics, International Politics/Relations and more into a cohesive explanation of our current world challenges standing in the way of living together on this planet for a long time to come without our current inequalities and threats to life itself. I've recommended it to all my friends and colleagues and I recommend it to anyone who reads my review. It's a time investment, but well worth every second I spent. | who reads my review. It's a | Time | investment, but well worth every second | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | It gives a well based numeric approach to sustainable development, but fails to approach some subjects from an ethical point of view. At some time, Prof. Sachs points out a few numeric indicators that favor economic development, but when talking about reaching these numbers, he offers more than debatable ways. | ethical point of view. At some | Time | Prof. Sachs points out a few | Negative | 0.64 | 3.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Very Informative course but without Certificate. After spending so much time and efforts it should provide a certificate . | without Certificate. After spending so much | Time | and efforts it should provide a | Negative | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | I liked this course very much, especially because it was clear and well explained. During the lessons I could see how much efforts and passion Professor Sachs puts on this topic, which helped a lot in following the videos. There are just a couple of things I'd change: I'd give some material to read, mostly with graphs (it took some time to make the screenshot of each graph!). Moreover, I'd give a State of accomplishment at the end. | mostly with graphs (it took some | Time | to make the screenshot of each | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Most pertinent course offered, teaching what the real problems of our time are. Can't recommend this course or his book enough. | what the real problems of our | Time | are. Can't recommend this course or | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Excellent Course! There're so many things we should to know, in order to make a better world, we're still on time to change what has been made wrong, there's a planet to save, there's a task for doing...Let's start now! | a better world, we're still on | Time | to change what has been made | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | The course covered the material thoroughly, but the presentation could be improved: 1. the examples, charts and other helpful aside additions could be left on screen during the relevant discussion. I often had to pause and go back to study the material that was only briefly displayed. 2. Using the screen for just a video of the lecturer speaking seems a waste of the many video techniques that could be included, with the lecturer in a small window at the side. 3. Although the lecturers tried not to favor one brand over another, at times it seemed like we were watching an infomercial. Maybe this can't be helped, as all the camera's features, and their accessories, were described in detail. I for one have a camera that I want to learn to use more professionally. Purchase suggestions could be moved to an addendum. In my opinion it should not be in the body of the course material. I am finding a lot of good information in the course, and am continuing with the second section. | favor one brand over another, at | Time | it seemed like we were watching | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | The first week was quite suitable and I had enough time to spend. The only problem was in editing of clips. They had bad cuts. | quite suitable and I had enough | Time | to spend. The only problem was | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Very good coarse...I am now taking #3 soon be finished, its just keeps getting better all the time...its so good I may move to Michigan, .... but then who would root for USC (Trojans- the real USC | just keeps getting better all the | Time | . . its so good I | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Good: very wide and also deep in transferring knowedge assignments are clear and challenging because they require a story to which the shots ghave to follow Not so good: sometimes the shown examples are show too shortly, and the videos toggle between professor and motiv to fast. Show both at the same time woiuld help the (iOs) app is a bit limited (e.g. assessments can not be edited). | fast. Show both at the same | Time | woiuld help the (iOs) app is | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Absolutely amazing! I had been waiting for a course like this for a long time. | course like this for a long | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | I learned a great deal with this course and have become more confident in photography. There are a few little problems with the quizzes, but considering this is the first time the course is offered, that is quite normal. | but considering this is the first | Time | the course is offered, that is | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | Not sure why so much time was devoted to camera bags. Looking forward to the next lessons. Hoping to learn about being more creative with a camera. | Not sure why so much | Time | was devoted to camera bags. Looking | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | I found this class to be very helpful in exploring the art of photography. If you want to learn more of the basics and beginning elements of photography this is a great start. The classes are to the point and not very time consuming. The assignments are well written to make you go out and start using your camera. | to the point and not very | Time | consuming. The assignments are well written | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| u3goXsk9EeWT3Aqsn0BGnQ | So much disjointed information.... I felt absolutely crushed trying to learn and understand all this. Am waiting for another 8 hours before I can reattempt the quiz. Personally, I feel that this course assumes the student is automatically an expert in statistics (simply due to completing the first intro to statistics course). The logical progression of how to approach different problems - and the terminology of the statements involved has been thrown out the window... If you're new to statistics, I suggest you should at least double the time allocation they provided... | you should at least double the | Time | allocation they provided. . . | Negative | 0.74 | 2.0 |
| 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. | at his notes for a long | Time | It's great to hear a stats | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I feel that I wasted my time and money on this course to be very honest. Should have requested a refund when I could. The professor really doesn't put in the effort like other professors on Coursera. He is literally reading out the content on each slide. The content isn't very enlightening either, it's just facts about mobile technology and their release dates. One can read that up on wikipedia I honestly think this course should be taken off this platform so no one else falls for it as I did. If you're reading this before you enroll, don't do it, don't waste your time and money on this. | I feel that I wasted my | Time | and money on this course to | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I feel that I wasted my time and money on this course to be very honest. Should have requested a refund when I could. The professor really doesn't put in the effort like other professors on Coursera. He is literally reading out the content on each slide. The content isn't very enlightening either, it's just facts about mobile technology and their release dates. One can read that up on wikipedia I honestly think this course should be taken off this platform so no one else falls for it as I did. If you're reading this before you enroll, don't do it, don't waste your time and money on this. | don't do it, don't waste your | Time | and money on this. | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Honestly, this course was a waste of time. The professor seems to have gathered some information about the version history of iOS and android platforms, thrown it onto some slides, and then reads from those slides. There is no discussion of the context of those technologies. | this course was a waste of | Time | The professor seems to have gathered | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This is certainly not an-depth look at smartphone technology. The lecturer just reads aloud the text on screen, without fleshing out the concepts therein or providing any explanation. Anybody can tell me what an acronym stands for - I want to know what these features actually do, how they work, how they're developed. I have no desire to upgrade to the whole package for this course. It's a time waster. | package for this course. It's a | Time | waster. | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This is only theory related to the evolution of the systems. How their features change over the time. I personally think that it is useless because you really do not learn anything. | How their features change over the | Time | I personally think that it is | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 |
| uGmLdI_nEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Thanks to the course, learned a few tips on online searching. Some contents could be consolidated to shorten session times. Overall, appreciated Coursera's knowledge sharing. | could be consolidated to shorten session | Time | Overall, appreciated Coursera's knowledge sharing. | Positive | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| uhCqzJVDEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | Exceptionally well presented course. Professor McPhee is a great teacher. He engages you and takes you through the complex events of the French Revolution at a very comfortable pace. I'm currently reading his book: Liberty or Death, The French Revolution. I highly recommend it as a companion to this course. My plan is to watch this course again when I finish the book in a couple of weeks. I want to take this opportunity to thank Coursera for offering this, and other courses; and Professor McPhee for taking the time to put together this series of lectures. | and Professor McPhee for taking the | Time | to put together this series of | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| uhCqzJVDEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | good course, wish it went into more depth but overall worth one's time | more depth but overall worth one's | Time | | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| uhCqzJVDEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | An interesting approach to the French Revolution time. (8/10) | interesting approach to the French Revolution | Time | (8/10) | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| uh_Pun3OEeW-FwqtbgSK1Q | Amazing Course. Enjoyed every bit of it. Only constraint is that of finding time for the course in my current hectic daily routine. | Only constraint is that of finding | Time | for the course in my current | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| uh_Pun3OEeW-FwqtbgSK1Q | Very interesting course, with properly selected chapters and a friendly environment and interface. I did not have any prior experience with Python and i was able to learn a lot in this course and i enjoyed spending this time. Thank you very much professors! | course and i enjoyed spending this | Time | Thank you very much professors! | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| uh_Pun3OEeW-FwqtbgSK1Q | Great course, great instructors, was hard, but the community of learners was fantastic and helped out a lot. Pace is face, be ready to commit time to it. It is really necessary to take Part 1 first, unless you don't need it. | is face, be ready to commit | Time | to it. It is really necessary | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| uiT8U5oIEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | This is perhaps one of the most clearly taught courses I have had on Coursera. Thank you for putting in time to teach us! | Coursera. Thank you for putting in | Time | to teach us! | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| uiT8U5oIEeWQGBKrxISOrQ | Very informative course. Because I am new to this, it was at times confusing. But overall, great teaching and great experience. Thank you. | new to this, it was at | Time | confusing. But overall, great teaching and | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Great topic, but the course was less interesting and profound than I expected. The professor could be a little more motivating. Worth the time though! | a little more motivating. Worth the | Time | though! | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Interesting and well presented. I completed the entire course, all lectures and assignments. However, week 1 is persistently listed as "overdue" even though it was actually completed ahead of time. Please remove from the "overdue" status which incessantly prompts me to join an upcoming new session. I enjoyed the course but this technical snafu is annoying. | it was actually completed ahead of | Time | Please remove from the " overdue" | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I didn't understand very much of this course. Instructor relies heavily on the use of various charts. They were seldom explained in a way I could understand. Instructor seemed to believe that underlining things in the charts served as an explanation. After completing the entire course & listening to many of the lessons several times, I can't tell you "what we like to hear and why". Instructor speaks in a monotone with no emotion. Seems bored stiff. Seems like he's just talking, but his mind is elsewhere. Quizzes frequently contained questions for material to be covered in a future lesson | to many of the lessons several | Time | I can't tell you " what | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I felt more like I was part of some experiment to see how long I could tolerate boredom than that I was in class where someone was trying to share knowledge with me. Needless to say I did not make it to the end which is sad because I was genuinely interested in the content. The instructor's delivery was absolutely monotone and he did not seem to emphasize the key points in any way so I found it very difficult to retain any information or to even stay awake at times. | or to even stay awake at | Time | | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | I was most excited about taking this class (in fact, it's how I found the specialization as a whole) and I did not get as much out of it as I was hoping for. :-\ I think that it's geared to too wide of an audience, so we didn't get as specific as I was anticipating. I also felt that a lot of the time of the videos were taken up by telling us what not to do. ("You don't want to be too far to this side, but you don't want to be too far to the other side, right?") I did get some good information out of this class, but I found a disconnect between the lectures and the homework. When we were assigned an elevator pitch as an assignment, it might have been nice to have seen some examples of elevator pitches--what makes a good (or a bad) elevator pitch? What kind of things would be a good idea to include? Concrete examples would have been super helpful. Submitting my homework and then seeing that other people did vastly different stuff made me question my own submission (Did we just take it in a different direction or did I (or they) misunderstand the assignment?) but since we're all peer reviewing, it's a case of the blind leading the blind there. This also happened with the SWOT Document...which I don't think was even mentioned in the lectures at all in-depth. Again, it would have been helpful to have seen some concrete examples, as I've never heard of that document before. | felt that a lot of the | Time | of the videos were taken up | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | corrections were a bit subjective and | Time | consuming. | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The Good > A lot of content > Provided a lot of outside reading material > Passionate professor > A lot of good refreshers (about CVs, teamwork, business practices) Suggestions > I hope in the future more time could be spent on monetization theories and practices > More emphasis on mobile games (as much as I dislike them) > Maybe some type of "case study" examples about games from conceptualization to publishing | I hope in the future more | Time | could be spent on monetization theories | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Of the courses in the Game Development Specialization, none of them prepared me for what it would be like financially to make a game and create a name for myself as a developer. Not only does the course cover ways on how to finance making a game or game studio, it gives students resources they can use as reference when planning to make a business of their own or joining an existing business (such a a AAA studio or small game studio), and what pros and cons each decision may have for them. The coursework was thorough, and I enjoyed my time in the course. | was thorough, and I enjoyed my | Time | in the course. | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| URpKtPs6EeSnBSIACi-PoQ | really I liked this model in which the slide is always appearing and the teacher seems very knowledgeable and interested in the subject. I enjoyed the class in which he was shown the lesson he gave to his students, was very cool to see their interaction with the subject and gave more movement to the course. I liked also that whatever the teacher says is on the slides, so I lost less time taking notes and paying more attention to what he says, giving more agility to the course. | the slides, so I lost less | Time | taking notes and paying more attention | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| URpKtPs6EeSnBSIACi-PoQ | It took me two sessions to complete the course due to starting the first session late and being behind the curve time wise the entire way through. The topics are fascinating and illuminating. I've worked for technology entrepreneurs for most of my 20+ year career, and this course (plus two others offered in the same Specialization) shed light on many issues of entrepreneur success for me. Whether a 'for credit' course or not, this is valuable education and a very compelling introduction to the Master's program at University of Maryland MTECH. | late and being behind the curve | Time | wise the entire way through. The | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Wonderful course, after some time I will repeat. Thank you very much Prof. Chris Impey, you have given me much insight. We keep in touch, best regards, Bob | Wonderful course, after some | Time | I will repeat. Thank you very | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | This course is bad! I had come upto week 4. While Chris Impey is knowledgeable and good, the course structure is very poor and leaves a lot to be desired. I would venture to make some suggestions: a. Restrict each video to a max of 7 minutes. More than that makes one sleepy. b. Reduce the number of videos in each module to a max of say 6. c. Instead of having Chris expound it like an audio reading, please include some slides, pictures,tables so that the matter to be learnt becomes self evident and Chris doesn't have to speak so much. A good example is the Coursera "The Global Financial Crisis", which I am also doing currently. d. If you feel all the material in this course has to be studied, then to achieve the objectives in (a) and (b) above, divide this course into two parts, Astronomy: Exploring Time and Space - part I & II. e. The written assignments are very simple and do not require any mental resources other than memory. Can you make the questions more challenging? For example, in Telescopes (Assignment 2), can you not ask a question like "In addition to Atacama, Chile, using Google earth, which other parts of the globe may be suitable for installation of ground based telescopes?" or "To obviate the blurring effect of the atmosphere, discuss the possibility of high altitude balloon based telescopes?" or "What do you feel about the fact that since today's mobile phones have high computing ability, their components can be used to make a low-cost space based interferometric telescopes?" Kudos to Chris and his team! On the whole, knowledge wise, this is a good course. | course into two parts, Astronomy: Exploring | Time | and Space - part I & | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The contents of the course are great and prof. Impey is a great communicator. The course is easy to follow, the final chapters on galaxies and cosmology are a bit more difficult but that is due to the nature of the subject and I applaud that the prof does not "dumb it down" or brushes over such difficult ans speculative subjects. I minor nuisance for me were the frequent songs and funny videos interspersed in the course content. It would have been better if they were separate from the main videos or otherwise could be easily skipped by people who don't have a lot of time. overall a great course! | who don't have a lot of | Time | overall a great course! | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| usIwBhODEeWfzgpfp_iBVw | I love the well-prepared, accessible style of the course. I also enjoyed how it progressed in building block style. I will be downloading and rewatching many episodes trying to absorb more information. I will definitely take it again next time it's around! Thanks for all your hard work! | will definitely take it again next | Time | it's around! Thanks for all your | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| UTmoThr5EeWqIgq-TOy4Xw | Excelent course, complete, including information about new drugs and studies for treatment, well explained, it requires time and attention, totally worth it! | for treatment, well explained, it requires | Time | and attention, totally worth it! | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| UTmoThr5EeWqIgq-TOy4Xw | very informative and interesting course. However it was mind bogglingly confusing about what was exactly required for the final assignment. Please be clearer next time! | final assignment. Please be clearer next | Time | | Negative | 0.79 | 3.0 |
| UTmoThr5EeWqIgq-TOy4Xw | Very informative course - I knew nothing about diabetes before, now I learnt quite a bit for my needs. Struggled at times with some tutors' English but subtitles always helped. Highly recommended course! | bit for my needs. Struggled at | Time | with some tutors' English but subtitles | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| UTmoThr5EeWqIgq-TOy4Xw | great one but my certificate is over .... I just enrolled for a second time just to learn about the research advanced without sending homework and my passed certificate is over .... | I just enrolled for a second | Time | just to learn about the research | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | very good coarse...would like a copy for reference.... what can we do about that? oh and by the way this coarse is so beautiful...I took photography for four years at a local junior college and didn't learn (or remember) nearly as much while being challenged and having fun at the same time.... its is so good you want to learn more....and you sure can, I am on fire trying to find out MORE. I now read quite a few articles about photography in various publications, as most "latest" info comes through the grapevine. I always inquire as " How did he do that"? it's amazing how much I don't know! Good job guys | and having fun at the same | Time | . . . its is so | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | This course was awesome! It totally unlocked the secrets of ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, and focal distance. Now instead of floundering around by zooming in and out hoping to get a good shot, I can compose a shot in manual mode and get close to the exposure or effect I was intending to get. (Well, most of the time anyway.) | to get. (Well, most of the | Time | anyway. ) | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Peter & Mark hit a home run with this course, very thorough , great advice,this was a course full of knowledge and at the same time I truly enjoyed their way of delivering the content. | of knowledge and at the same | Time | I truly enjoyed their way of | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | I lost a great deal of | Time | viewing incomplete videos and trying to | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | The only content I had access to were lectures, but I still want to say that I really liked this course. And I'm looking forward to another courses of this specialization. I'm a music student with bachelor's degree in Computer Science and dozens of coursera certificates (from the times they were free), I'm curious about everything. I used to say that I'll learn to paint when I retire :) But it turned out that I can do pretty good photos without having to wait until retirement. It's not the same thing, of course, but it's a visual art. This course and "Cameras, Exposure, and Photography" teached me a lot and brought so much joy into my life. I'm not planning to make money as a photographer, but I'm happy to have an opportunity to create better and better photographs. Thank you, Prof. Glendinning and Prof. Sullivan. And thanks to everyone who helped to create this course. My photos can be found here, in case you're curious: https://www.flickr.com/photos/140271759@N03/ Most of them are made with my old cheap digital camera, only a few with a new DSLR. I would never have the courage and motivation to buy it without your courses. Thanks again for all the happiness photography brings into my life :) | dozens of coursera certificates (from the | Time | they were free), I'm curious about | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Got lost and left behind very quickly even after watching videos numerous times and doing additional research. There were videos missing even with deadlines approaching. Some videos were very well explained while others I didn't understand at all. | quickly even after watching videos numerous | Time | and doing additional research. There were | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | I have learned more about photography in the short few weeks than I have studying by myself in much more time. Great course. | studying by myself in much more | Time | Great course. | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | The explanations are a bit and drawn out. For non-native English speakers, this is very difficult to understand as well at time difficult for native speakers. Also, the course for auditors is not very interactive and we cannot participate in some quizzes and work submission. | difficult to understand as well at | Time | difficult for native speakers. Also, the | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | This course has complimented the lessons I have been learning and I appreciate it is on-demand and self-paced. I am a busy professional with a family and I need to be able to learn on my own time. Great material. Thanks! | able to learn on my own | Time | Great material. Thanks! | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | The lecture presents Google's ZMOT marketing model, how it benefited (and shaped) marketing research and strategies to increase conversion and loyalty. It is a good contextual introduction if you never heard of "search engine marketing", "cost per acquisition" or "click through rate". If you know the basics, it is probably not a good use of your time. I didn't like that the content feels like evangelism for (paid) google services, and most sources of the course are either random blogs or related to interested parties (google, twitter). I still learnt a couple of cool metrics I didn't know about, but the course didn't bring any added value to the blog links provided. | not a good use of your | Time | I didn't like that the content | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | I liked this class. I have mixed feelings about this course not using due dates. On the one hand it's stress-free because I'm not penalized if I don't finish the assignment in a timely fashion. But at the same time, I'm less motivated to complete everything. Luckily I am a completionist so I did everything I needed to complete the class. But I can't say the same for everyone... | timely fashion. But at the same | Time | I'm less motivated to complete everything. | Positive | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| u_Rrw_tfEeSuiSIACwuNww | Great course, Ari was very helpful and reaches out regularly. Also arranged meetups on his own travel time, on one of which I met him. | arranged meetups on his own travel | Time | on one of which I met | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I have mixed feelings about this course. I notice that a lot of courses like these in US colleges are incredibly glorified. The professor sounds knowledgeable, I have to admit. The material, however, seems mostly like common sense. Most of it is life skills that you simply pick up over time. Just like business courses, people love to label everything concept or process with some kind of nice sounding term to make it look professional or whatever. Also, very boring. | that you simply pick up over | Time | Just like business courses, people love | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This is a very good course.It covers all the aspects of negotiations.The professor delivering the lectures makes sure that the lectures are enjoyable.I had a great time listening to him and participating in the exercises. | are enjoyable. I had a great | Time | listening to him and participating in | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | A very detailed course , effective to develop one's negotiation skills , also focuses on the concepts (for example: mediation) relevant in current/future time,really satisfied. | (for example: mediation) relevant in current/future | Time | really satisfied. | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Thank you Professor Siedel. This course has accompanied me through stressful and hard time, in my first year of small business. What I have learnt will still accompany me. Thank you. | accompanied me through stressful and hard | Time | in my first year of small | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | The final negotiation homework was very interesting, and useful in internalizing the concepts. I didn't like the fact that the course spent a lot of time covering legal topics. Perhaps due to the instructor's legal background. I wish there were practical recommendations on salary negotiation. | the course spent a lot of | Time | covering legal topics. Perhaps due to | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | great course highly understandable time well spent!!!! | great course highly understandable | Time | well spent! ! ! ! | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I absolutely LOVED this course. I have been in the negotiation business for many years and feel that I learned so much from this course and cannot wait to apply my new found knowledge. It was not easy by any means and did leave me flustered at times but only because it took me away from my comfort zones from time to time. This course is a MUST for anybody that thinks they know it all about negotiating! I know I thought I did before I took it! Thank you so much Professor Siedel! | and did leave me flustered at | Time | but only because it took me | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I absolutely LOVED this course. I have been in the negotiation business for many years and feel that I learned so much from this course and cannot wait to apply my new found knowledge. It was not easy by any means and did leave me flustered at times but only because it took me away from my comfort zones from time to time. This course is a MUST for anybody that thinks they know it all about negotiating! I know I thought I did before I took it! Thank you so much Professor Siedel! | away from my comfort zones from | Time | to time. This course is a | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I absolutely LOVED this course. I have been in the negotiation business for many years and feel that I learned so much from this course and cannot wait to apply my new found knowledge. It was not easy by any means and did leave me flustered at times but only because it took me away from my comfort zones from time to time. This course is a MUST for anybody that thinks they know it all about negotiating! I know I thought I did before I took it! Thank you so much Professor Siedel! | my comfort zones from time to | Time | This course is a MUST for | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Some of the speeches are really very long and need patience to finish. I'm happy that he exam is much easier and takes not very long time to get passed. | easier and takes not very long | Time | to get passed. | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I have thoroughly enjoyed this online course and have been able to broaden my skill set and understanding accordingly. This course has given me the tools and knowledge to plan out future negotiations and dispute management which is crucial in the field I work in. Thank you for taking the time to create such a vast and detailed course. As an international student, I also enjoyed learning more about Michigan and the core focus of the University. | in. Thank you for taking the | Time | to create such a vast and | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Some strategies I learnt, I would have never thought of. An interesting course and quite enjoyable. A great course for any business person who needs the essential ingredients for negotiating. Thank you to the lecturer and much appreciated. Perhaps a little additional material to give it some depth? I just felt a little more was needed to validate the material to put what we learn into practice. But apart from that, a worthwhile course for anyone that needs to negotiate in their business. I am sure I will refer back to this from time to time, as some pointers will help keep you in focus with your strategies. | will refer back to this from | Time | to time, as some pointers will | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Some strategies I learnt, I would have never thought of. An interesting course and quite enjoyable. A great course for any business person who needs the essential ingredients for negotiating. Thank you to the lecturer and much appreciated. Perhaps a little additional material to give it some depth? I just felt a little more was needed to validate the material to put what we learn into practice. But apart from that, a worthwhile course for anyone that needs to negotiate in their business. I am sure I will refer back to this from time to time, as some pointers will help keep you in focus with your strategies. | back to this from time to | Time | as some pointers will help keep | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Valuable and not too time consuming. | Valuable and not too | Time | consuming. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | It is a quite well structured course. Is missing a little bit "flash" to become more incentive, attractive. Negotiation is part of "sell and buy" something and many times is not only a scheme of calculus, could be also sentimental decision and in this case is difficult to determine the right value (value creation is like a bubble soap, nice but easy to break). | sell and buy" something and many | Time | is not only a scheme of | Positive | 0.74 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Direct, and valuable. Well worth time spent. | Direct, and valuable. Well worth | Time | spent. | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I thought the instructor was very well organized, and knowledgeable. However, the information I received, at times, appeared more descriptive than informative. What I mean, is that I feel that we were told a lot about how things are, and very little about what to do. Overall, great instructor, I had expected more "strategy" and "guidance." | However, the information I received, at | Time | appeared more descriptive than informative. What | Positive | 0.93 | 2.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | very useful & professional course full of illustrated examples which facilitate understanding , I enjoyed being one of professor's Siedel online students and I hope I will repeat this experiment another time | I will repeat this experiment another | Time | | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Enjoyed the professor, but there was lots of fluff and ultimately spent far too much time focusing on legalities and minor details and less on actually imparting negotiating skills. | and ultimately spent far too much | Time | focusing on legalities and minor details | Negative | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Very useful course! Decided to take it on my spare time after graduating, it definitely has a very broad application. It will definitely come in handy in the future! Thank you! | to take it on my spare | Time | after graduating, it definitely has a | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | It has been an honor and pleasure being able to listen to Professor Siedel's lectures on successful negotiation strategies. As a law student interested in business/finance/corporate law, his course has been a great comprehensive look at the interconnectedness of business and law. The humility with which Professor Siedel possesses is humbling and extraordinary of a person of his intellectual caliber and professional accomplishments. Many law/business professors I have known are rather intimidating and unsettling. I have learned an invaluable amount of very unique knowledge and skills that Mr.Siedel teaches to some of the most important financial and legal movers and shakers around the world. Yet despite his reaches throughout the world, he seems like the most kind and relatable man. His jokes are impeccably timed, especially during a lesson that may seem a bit dry or difficult and I never found his lectures to be boring. In fact, throughout my time with the course I always looked forward to the videos and am very sad to see the end of them. Additionally, I had the mindset that in order to be successful in business or law, I'd have to adapt more of a detached, zero-sum approach to my professional life. Not only has Professor Siedel changed my idea of how business and legal negotiations work, he has shown that there is in fact more to be gained by seeing people as people and not as mere numbers. Thanks for not just the academic lessons, but life lessons as well. I hope to walk in beauty much as you do Professor Siedel. | be boring. In fact, throughout my | Time | with the course I always looked | Negative | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Very interesting and useful. Mr Siedel is bright and explains well. The whole course is worth spending time on it, even if you have the experience in negotiations already. It helps to rationalise and don't forget any aspect of the negotiation process up to the conclusion. Some concepts could be difficult to really understand if you don't get already an exposure to the American business culture. | The whole course is worth spending | Time | on it, even if you have | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | I'm an undergraduate student from Serbia and I liked this course very much. Professor is great, he gives examples all the time and perfectly summarizes every lecture. It is noticeable how much effort is put into making this course possible. I learned a lot of new things that I can use not only in my future career, but in everyday life. Thank you! Ana, 22 years old | great, he gives examples all the | Time | and perfectly summarizes every lecture. It | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This is a very interesting course. It is the first course I followed on Coursera and it worth my time and money. Various skills and strategies are being taught which I took for granted before. This course is helpful both for the day-to-day negotiation and for business ones. | on Coursera and it worth my | Time | and money. Various skills and strategies | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| V5SinKHsEeSqoSIACzsKQg | This course was my first experience in Cousera an i can say that is really amazing the way Dr. Boyd take us to all his experiences and knowledge. I had the opportunity to met him and i can say hi is a really great person, he gave me some advises about my future carrier and i really appreciate hi take his time to talk to me. Sincerely Thank you. Natalia Lancheros | i really appreciate hi take his | Time | to talk to me. Sincerely Thank | Positive | 0.66 | 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. | one really must spend some quality | Time | to learn everything that the course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | many subjects are not clear enough. it is better to put links and pictures than send us to look in lectures for a specific time frame. and still it was very interesting and motivating course. thanks! | look in lectures for a specific | Time | frame. and still it was very | Positive | 0.83 | 3.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | the Quiz. Also a lot of | Time | the system was very picky to | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | were cut to fix in the | Time | but they were cut a lot, | Negative | 0.72 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | and monotone. The content is many | Time | just rushed through and it's visible | Negative | 0.68 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | There must be something wrong to spend time on google&wiki much more than the course content. | must be something wrong to spend | Time | on google&wiki much more than the | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | it is almost a waste of | Time | to follow them. Lectures are completely | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | completely useless and most of the | Time | quizzes are note related with them. | Negative | 0.85 | 1.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course provides good exposure to the problems in legged robotics. The course lists multiple references to the books and articles, reading which is necessary to make this course more useful. I wish some more time would be devoted to dynamic models, including kinetic and potential energy calculation of the SLIP and other models. But one can find this kind of information elsewhere, for example, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhk9xLjrmi4 and http://ocw.mit.edu/2-003SCF11 | more useful. I wish some more | Time | would be devoted to dynamic models, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course helped me identify my interest at the intersection of biomechanics and robotics. The lectures were very motivating which gave a birds eye view of the background and research in mobility of legged robots. While watching the lectures, I expected programming assignments involving simulation of dynamics and control of the templates and further perform compositions with them but didn't find them much. In a few assignments, the wording of the questions was ambiguous or the grader accepted only certain answers; hence, consumed a lot of time. However, the TAs were very helpful in clearing most of the doubts very quickly which also made solving the assignments easier. Further, it provided references to abundant resources to steer the student in the right direction to pursue specific interests. Overall, this four-week course provided a very good intuitive understanding of the dynamics and control of legged mobility in animals and robots. | answers; hence, consumed a lot of | Time | However, the TAs were very helpful | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | I have taken many courses on Coursera now, and I've enjoyed and learned a lot from most of them, but I have to admit I was disappointed with this one, despite having a deep interest in modern art and art theory. Here are some of my criticisms: 1. The course is aimed at teachers and art educators, which was not made at all clear on the course info page, apart from a single reference to the 'pedagogical framework'. If I'd understood this, I may well not have enrolled. 2. I found the course very basic, with no consideration of art theory beyond a level appropriate for classroom discussion. This is in contrast to many other Coursera courses, which have been pitched at graduate level or above. I don't really feel like I learned anything on this course. 3. The video lectures are very short and uninformative, but the weekly reading list is very long and much more time consuming that the actual tuition. I would have preferred a better balance between tutorials and reading. 4. The weekly quizzes were very short (six questions, where other courses typically have 20 to 30 questions per module), and and questions focus almost entirely on the pedagogical set texts, with very little attention paid to the art history or the works discussed in the tutorials. If you are not going to be tested on the material, what is the point of all that required reading? 5. The final peer-assessed assignment is lacking in instructions or guidance. For example, you are required to upload images of 3 or 4 artworks and discuss them. It is in fact impossible to upload more than a single image, but there are no instructions on what to do about this. People found various workarounds - uploading pdfs or Word documents, or zipped folders of images, but really, there should be some official guidance on this. 6. Comments made when assessing other students' work are not anonymous - this is unique in my Coursera experience, where anonymous marking is the norm, and knowing how fractious people can get when they are disappointed with their grade, I am not at all happy about having my name made available to them. Overall, the only reason I persisted with this course is that I wanted to get a certificate with MoMA written on it. Too bad I couldn't have actually learned something as well. | is very long and much more | Time | consuming that the actual tuition. I | Positive | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Love this course sooo much and I spent a lot of time for the last assignment >3< | and I spent a lot of | Time | for the last assignment >3< | Negative | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course gives introduction of plenty of artworks from MoMA, but it will be more interesting if it shows more details and explanations about the artwork itself or the background of the time and the society. | itself or the background of the | Time | and the society. | Positive | 0.86 | 2.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course is designed for school teachers and, perhaps, for art museum's workers. I'm neither, but I took this course because I'd like to know more about the modern art. The course is essentially a merge of two independent parts, namely, videos about artworks and papers about different theories of education in art. I took this course because of artworks, so I was not interested in papers. Videos were great; especially the first one in each lesson. Even my husband, who isn't fond of art in general, found these videos interesting. In videos, lecturer explains history and meaning of each piece of art. Required reading was dramatically different. First, students are required to read at least 10 pages (art papers) about approaches in teaching AND at least 4 articles in museum's website PER WEEK. Actually, careful reading not just browsing does take a lot of time, in fact, it takes way more time per week than claimed. In addition, these reading were not useful for me! I am not interested in teaching art, and reading same facts about artworks that I've heard in lectures is waste of my time. Seriously, I and most of people grasp most of the ideas from the first time; even if not, I would watch the video again. Why should I do extra reading that brings me no extra knowledge? On a good side, one can pass quiz without any reading. Just a bit of thinking process, and you pass with 5/6 or 6/6 score. Overall, the course is attractive because of amazing videos. However, I believe that this course must be reorganized in two different courses - one would be about artworks and understanding of art, another would be about teaching techniques in art. | browsing does take a lot of | Time | in fact, it takes way more | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course is designed for school teachers and, perhaps, for art museum's workers. I'm neither, but I took this course because I'd like to know more about the modern art. The course is essentially a merge of two independent parts, namely, videos about artworks and papers about different theories of education in art. I took this course because of artworks, so I was not interested in papers. Videos were great; especially the first one in each lesson. Even my husband, who isn't fond of art in general, found these videos interesting. In videos, lecturer explains history and meaning of each piece of art. Required reading was dramatically different. First, students are required to read at least 10 pages (art papers) about approaches in teaching AND at least 4 articles in museum's website PER WEEK. Actually, careful reading not just browsing does take a lot of time, in fact, it takes way more time per week than claimed. In addition, these reading were not useful for me! I am not interested in teaching art, and reading same facts about artworks that I've heard in lectures is waste of my time. Seriously, I and most of people grasp most of the ideas from the first time; even if not, I would watch the video again. Why should I do extra reading that brings me no extra knowledge? On a good side, one can pass quiz without any reading. Just a bit of thinking process, and you pass with 5/6 or 6/6 score. Overall, the course is attractive because of amazing videos. However, I believe that this course must be reorganized in two different courses - one would be about artworks and understanding of art, another would be about teaching techniques in art. | in fact, it takes way more | Time | per week than claimed. In addition, | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course is designed for school teachers and, perhaps, for art museum's workers. I'm neither, but I took this course because I'd like to know more about the modern art. The course is essentially a merge of two independent parts, namely, videos about artworks and papers about different theories of education in art. I took this course because of artworks, so I was not interested in papers. Videos were great; especially the first one in each lesson. Even my husband, who isn't fond of art in general, found these videos interesting. In videos, lecturer explains history and meaning of each piece of art. Required reading was dramatically different. First, students are required to read at least 10 pages (art papers) about approaches in teaching AND at least 4 articles in museum's website PER WEEK. Actually, careful reading not just browsing does take a lot of time, in fact, it takes way more time per week than claimed. In addition, these reading were not useful for me! I am not interested in teaching art, and reading same facts about artworks that I've heard in lectures is waste of my time. Seriously, I and most of people grasp most of the ideas from the first time; even if not, I would watch the video again. Why should I do extra reading that brings me no extra knowledge? On a good side, one can pass quiz without any reading. Just a bit of thinking process, and you pass with 5/6 or 6/6 score. Overall, the course is attractive because of amazing videos. However, I believe that this course must be reorganized in two different courses - one would be about artworks and understanding of art, another would be about teaching techniques in art. | in lectures is waste of my | Time | Seriously, I and most of people | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | The required reading is a bit long, and because it's all written, it's hard to go through at one time. So would there be some videos source instead I could use to facilitate learning in a more visual way? | hard to go through at one | Time | So would there be some videos | Negative | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| v9CQdBkhEeWjrA6seF25aw | Nice idea, but too many technical difficulties. I tried to complete quiz 4 nine times and eventually passed the deadline. And in order to submit my final assignment I had to embedded my images into a word doc and export it as a PDF... I won't get extra marks for being able to work THAT out! ; ) I did enjoy the rest of the course though. Thanks for all your efforts. | tried to complete quiz 4 nine | Time | and eventually passed the deadline. And | Negative | 0.72 | 2.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The information is fascinating and the instructor is very interesting. It's a great course!! The only drawbacks are that there is so much reading to do (but you can succeed in the course and only do as much of the reading as you want to) and the 70 question final exam (but given that you can take it as many times as you want you can get any grade that you're willing to put in the time for). All in all I highly recommend this course. | you can take it as many | Time | as you want you can get | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | The information is fascinating and the instructor is very interesting. It's a great course!! The only drawbacks are that there is so much reading to do (but you can succeed in the course and only do as much of the reading as you want to) and the 70 question final exam (but given that you can take it as many times as you want you can get any grade that you're willing to put in the time for). All in all I highly recommend this course. | you're willing to put in the | Time | for). All in all I highly | Positive | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | It was a privilege listening to this passionate and clear guide through the history of technology and antitrust with all the relevant docs . Each time I finished a segment I could not help listening to the next one. Like in a good tv series! | all the relevant docs . Each | Time | I finished a segment I could | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| V9_aHBU7EeWfzgpfp_iBVw | Prof Randy Picker is an engaging instructor. Material has sufficient rigor and is well presented. At first I was worried as I don't have a legal background, but I feel it is presented at an understandable. If you spend any time on the Internet, you will learn incredible history from a legal and economics standpoint. Take this class! | an understandable. If you spend any | Time | on the Internet, you will learn | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | This is the best online course. I want to pursue my Masters in Construction Management and this course has helped me to get an idea of how its to manage stuffs around the globe. I would like to thank Coursera for such a beautiful course. Its worth spending time for this course. Just go for it. | a beautiful course. Its worth spending | Time | for this course. Just go for | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | The course has important insights about the Planning a Project. I really liked it and it was not time consuming, you can do it easily with your daily routine. Really good! | liked it and it was not | Time | consuming, you can do it easily | Positive | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | It is not fine that the courses close like every 3 months, I do this project with my school and we have just 1 hour a week so I have to change every time my courses wich I do not like. I only like this course | so I have to change every | Time | my courses wich I do not | Negative | 0.81 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Engaging and informative. Time well spent! I recommend this course without hesitation to all those who wish to get into project management or who, like me, have been project managers without a specific formal training. I knew several project management tools from university (network planning, for instance) and this course was my chance to revise them, adding many intersting concepts on top. The teaching style is great. If you take the time to go back and watch the lectures more than once you'll find interesting information that you might have missed the first time and that will add much to your appreciation of the topic. In one word: great! I wish there were an advanced PM course by Yael Grushka-Cockayne. Her way to describe topics is really clear! | Engaging and informative. | Time | well spent! I recommend this course | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Engaging and informative. Time well spent! I recommend this course without hesitation to all those who wish to get into project management or who, like me, have been project managers without a specific formal training. I knew several project management tools from university (network planning, for instance) and this course was my chance to revise them, adding many intersting concepts on top. The teaching style is great. If you take the time to go back and watch the lectures more than once you'll find interesting information that you might have missed the first time and that will add much to your appreciation of the topic. In one word: great! I wish there were an advanced PM course by Yael Grushka-Cockayne. Her way to describe topics is really clear! | is great. If you take the | Time | to go back and watch the | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Engaging and informative. Time well spent! I recommend this course without hesitation to all those who wish to get into project management or who, like me, have been project managers without a specific formal training. I knew several project management tools from university (network planning, for instance) and this course was my chance to revise them, adding many intersting concepts on top. The teaching style is great. If you take the time to go back and watch the lectures more than once you'll find interesting information that you might have missed the first time and that will add much to your appreciation of the topic. In one word: great! I wish there were an advanced PM course by Yael Grushka-Cockayne. Her way to describe topics is really clear! | you might have missed the first | Time | and that will add much to | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Excellent coaching by professor Yael Grushka Cockayne. Its explained in simple language that any one can easily understand. I happy with the way course moves and enjoying studying in my leisure time. Ashokkumar S | and enjoying studying in my leisure | Time | Ashokkumar S | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | This was my first online course and I like it a lot. The course was well structured, well taught and covered relevant aspects of project planning and project management. It made me think about things I or our company is not doing (I'm not a project manager but impacted by it). And it gave me some tools to improve on individual and on company level. Everything was very practical and insightful. The cases helped as well and I liked the YouTube material. If there were topics that I would like to have had more information, then on Agile Project Management, as this becomes more and more important in my industry. And then it would have been helpful to get more insights on how to estimate time and especially budgets, knowing that this course is not about financial or ressource planning and understanding that these aspects vary from company to company and from project to project. Nevertheless it might have helped (me) but the course provided everything to figure it out anyway. Overall I can recommend this course for a solid base and inspiration in project planning and project management. | more insights on how to estimate | Time | and especially budgets, knowing that this | Positive | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | For the first time i took the course here, to be honest for me it was a little exam, i was thinking hmm, Could i do that??? This is a new field for me. Result: Yes, i did it!:-) Now, i like online way of learning! First of All i want to thank the University of Virginia and the lecturer Mrs. Yael Grushka-Cockayne and of course to you Coursera team and Leader! Good Luck guys! Thank you again!!! Fidan Badalova | For the first | Time | i took the course here, to | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | This course was a very valuable introduction to project planning & management and the terminology and techniques used. It also provided a good amount of information and was not dragged out over a long period of time. | out over a long period of | Time | | Negative | 0.62 | 5.0 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | This course was very educational. I thought the illustrations were helpful. My only negative comment was that the quiz questions were a little confusing at times and difficult to know what answer to choose. At times, multiple answers seemed correct based on the material presented in the lessons. I do plan to take Part 2. | questions were a little confusing at | Time | and difficult to know what answer | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | This course was very educational. I thought the illustrations were helpful. My only negative comment was that the quiz questions were a little confusing at times and difficult to know what answer to choose. At times, multiple answers seemed correct based on the material presented in the lessons. I do plan to take Part 2. | know what answer to choose. At | Time | multiple answers seemed correct based on | Positive | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Loved this course and Colleen. She quickly becomes one of my favourite teachers at Coursera. The course is informative, vell-structured and interesting. I might come back later and review in one more time, simply because it has some useful moments I do not want to forget. Assignments are well thought through and indeed valuable. I trully learned a lot! Thanks :) | later and review in one more | Time | simply because it has some useful | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This course is a good start if you already have a little experience with CSS. As a neophyte, I found that there was too much material for the amount of presentation time. I needed many more examples and exercises. I felt dejected each time the instructor said not to worry about getting it right and just experiment -- that's easy to say if you aren't being graded. The fact is that the material is extensive and often complicated, and it's imperative for me, as a student, to be correct as fast as possible. The result is that my grade (A) does not reflect my comprehension of the material. I managed to commit the material presented to short term memory so that I could pass the course, but as always happens when someone crams, the information is gone from my head. | material for the amount of presentation | Time | I needed many more examples and | Positive | 0.71 | 3.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This course is a good start if you already have a little experience with CSS. As a neophyte, I found that there was too much material for the amount of presentation time. I needed many more examples and exercises. I felt dejected each time the instructor said not to worry about getting it right and just experiment -- that's easy to say if you aren't being graded. The fact is that the material is extensive and often complicated, and it's imperative for me, as a student, to be correct as fast as possible. The result is that my grade (A) does not reflect my comprehension of the material. I managed to commit the material presented to short term memory so that I could pass the course, but as always happens when someone crams, the information is gone from my head. | and exercises. I felt dejected each | Time | the instructor said not to worry | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | I joined the course as an experienced web developer. My intention was to do a formal course in css as I only learnt on need to know basis so far. This course helped me learn about the amazing things that can be done with css, some of which I relied on javascript earlier. Professor Colleen teaches in a very sweet way, at the same time putting lot of emphasis on playing with code rather merely listening to lecturers. | very sweet way, at the same | Time | putting lot of emphasis on playing | Positive | 1.0 | 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! | on this subject. . . big | Time | Great course, I recommend it! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Learned an incredible amount of information in such a small amount of time! | in such a small amount of | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand. To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept. 1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me? 2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say "well, did you WATCH the lecture?" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help. I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing. | nothing is explained. The instructor says | Time | & time again that she's not | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand. To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept. 1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me? 2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say "well, did you WATCH the lecture?" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help. I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing. | explained. The instructor says time & | Time | again that she's not going to | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand. To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept. 1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me? 2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say "well, did you WATCH the lecture?" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help. I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing. | make matters worse, we are instructed | Time | & time again to go out | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand. To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept. 1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me? 2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say "well, did you WATCH the lecture?" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help. I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing. | worse, we are instructed time & | Time | again to go out onto the | Negative | 0.83 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand. To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept. 1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me? 2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say "well, did you WATCH the lecture?" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help. I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing. | will absolutely waste hours of your | Time | and way too much of your | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Nice, good explenation and practises. Logic order. Costs time, but he... no pain, no gain;) | explenation and practises. Logic order. Costs | Time | but he. . . no pain, | Negative | 0.93 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | As a beginner, this is a must take course! Dr. Colleen van Lent is excellent at hitting the right points, delivering the right content at the right time. Easy for anyone to learn. | the right content at the right | Time | Easy for anyone to learn. | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Most of the courses are great, but for some homework assignment, the requirement in video and reading material doesn't agree all the time. Sometime reading material only contains 3 requirements but video contains 4 or vise versa. Try to make them agree may save a lot of hassle | reading material doesn't agree all the | Time | Sometime reading material only contains 3 | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Teacher takes her time to explain things very simply and builds up from there. Great introduction. Will be taking more classes offered by the same professor. | Teacher takes her | Time | to explain things very simply and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something. | but very picky quizzes. Spent more | Time | frustrated with trick questions on quizzes | Negative | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| vIC_m1i_EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | I enjoyed spending time on this course because I could learn, have fun, and exchange a lot. | I enjoyed spending | Time | on this course because I could | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | The material is useful, but the execution is poor. There were numerous quiz questions that I think they just had coded wrong on their end. I think they need to carefully look at the questions with the most incorrect answers and ask themselves if they've made a mistake. Also, this might be the first time they've tried making a peer-reviewed project part of the course, but they did a poor job. They made it a homework assignment for week 2, but didn't make it clear that it wasn't due until the end of the course, even though Coursera sends you emails saying it's due soon. This caused a great deal of confusion. Some of the required readings also had broken links. It's odd nobody on their end checked those the week the material was taught. They do provide a lot of useful supplemental material (though often pay-walled). | Also, this might be the first | Time | they've tried making a peer-reviewed project | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | This course was very engaging.The reading materials took time to complete, but were essential to fully grasp the video lectures. I have already been able to apply some of these teachings to an unrelated field! Very enjoyable and rewarding. Thank you! | very engaging. The reading materials took | Time | to complete, but were essential to | Positive | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | There should be more than just lectures. I find the overall content to be very exciting but at times the lectures get a little boring and monotonous maybe. | to be very exciting but at | Time | the lectures get a little boring | Positive | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| VTyPXbMXEeW-cQqGkhsQ8w | Some times the videos aren´t in a logical sync with the upcoming activity, or the content from the video is somewhat vague and then not clearly explained in the class. | Some | Time | the videos aren´t in a logical | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| vU4CeqTaEeW2ORLv1OUyFQ | A useful course that gives practical guidelines on increasing physical activity in daily life. It specifies that even as low as 30 minutes of moderate physical exercise 5 times a day can be very beneficial to an otherwise sedentary person. | minutes of moderate physical exercise 5 | Time | a day can be very beneficial | Negative | 0.75 | 4.0 |
| vU4CeqTaEeW2ORLv1OUyFQ | Interesting course that I found inspiring. Well worth the time invested into completing it. | I found inspiring. Well worth the | Time | invested into completing it. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| vU4CeqTaEeW2ORLv1OUyFQ | There was nothing in the course that I didn't already know, but I'm no longer young & I didn't expect there to be. I wasn't wild about sitting through lectures about being active while pregnant or making sure my kids exercise. For me, that's a waste of time. I know what I need to be doing & I was hoping the course would inspire me to do it. Unfortunately, it did not. I got tired of hearing about walking or bicycling to work as the main way to get active. I am now retired, but even when I worked that was never an option. | For me, that's a waste of | Time | I know what I need to | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| vU4CeqTaEeW2ORLv1OUyFQ | The videos are really informative and cover most of the common concerns/excuses we have to avoid a physically active life style. I could connect to everything in the course and have improved my activity times from the past 3 weeks. This course definitely has given me a good push to improve myself. | course and have improved my activity | Time | from the past 3 weeks. This | Negative | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| VuRXs3EiEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | This course is terrible for many reasons. Firstly, the amount of content is ridiculously small - only about 20 minutes of video lectures per week. Moreover, more than 50% of content is just non-relevant. Secondly, practical assignments are very poorly planned: 1) in weeks 3 peer graded assignment students are asked to save Tableau workbooks as twbx files, even though this feature is not supported by Tableau Public that is used in this course. The assignment itself is just opening and saving file in Tableau. 2) in weeks 4 peer graded assignment you just asked to write some vaguely defined 1 page description. It doesn't include any Tableau-related activities. Thirdly, quizzes are ambiguous and very general. Overall, this course is just a waste of time. For comparison, you can easily get more useful information about Tableau from the 4 minute long "Getting started" video on the Tableau website than from this course. Just wonder how Coursera allows such courses to be places on the platform. | course is just a waste of | Time | For comparison, you can easily get | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| vV5KmA_3EeWPhwrBf2tcNQ | very interesting and worth using time loving it! | very interesting and worth using | Time | loving it! | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| W-hoIJw3EeWJORITtzkPnQ | Tons of value -- for free!! I hope in future iterations of this course you could include more tangible tools we can use to help grow our business. These lectures included a few resources -- but more could definitely be introduced. As a business owner myself, this course has shed some light on things I hadn't considered -- and offered a more academic approach to business. I hope in the future more "resources" could be included -- because I think many people considering starting their own business but don't realize how many excellent resources are available (and many times for free -- just take Coursera, for example!!) | excellent resources are available (and many | Time | for free -- just take Coursera, | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| W-hoIJw3EeWJORITtzkPnQ | This course covered every detail that a startup entrepreneur must take into account when launching an enterprise: from the naming of the brand and the pitch approach to the legal aspects in intellectual property. I have found interesting and important information that will surely help me save time in future planning. | that will surely help me save | Time | in future planning. | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| w7FFV3l0EeW53BJEfL52qQ | Too much material packed into too little time. 2nd week 2nd problem has 180 test cases... must pass 2/3 of problems to pass course. This means I'd have to spend countless hours just debugging test cases (177 of which are not even visible to you) in order to pass this course. Not for the faint of heart. If you have other commitments like work/school/kids, do not take this course .. lightly. Edited: I realised I gave out a low rating because I wasn't expecting the difficult level. In that sense the rating was biased. I've adjusted based on learning & how challenging the programming assignments are & also whether instructors listen to our feedback :) | much material packed into too little | Time | 2nd week 2nd problem has 180 | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| W9XMEny5EeW3pg6oA-kqJQ | Very useful course for entrepreneurs who don't want to invest their time looking for investors money | who don't want to invest their | Time | looking for investors money | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | For me, as mechanical engineer, it was very useful to see how this course, that I had some time ago in Serbia where I live and work, is presented at an top US and world university. Thank You so much Dr. Whiteman, Georgia Tech and Coursera for a really nice experience. Drazen Kosutic, BASc in M.E. | this course, that I had some | Time | ago in Serbia where I live | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Well structured, there's time for solving too , cool :) | Well structured, there's | Time | for solving too , cool :) | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| WChOZHTVEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Dear Professor, I love the way you taught me since last month. Your way of teaching, using real life examples, helped me to better understand and solve the problems. Thank You for sharing your lecture in Coursera and making it available so that a distant student like me can take advantage. And THANK YOU one more time Professor. Sudesh Pathak. | advantage. And THANK YOU one more | Time | Professor. Sudesh Pathak. | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| wD1C7I_eEeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | This was a good course, a little hard to follow at times but very beneficial. | a little hard to follow at | Time | but very beneficial. | Positive | 0.95 | 3.0 |
| wD1C7I_eEeWZyg6bf_Oxkw | It is ironic that a course about virtual instruction is one of the worst online courses I have taken. The content was good, if a little outdated (hence the two stars vs only one), but the course design and delivery were lacking. The videos were excruciating for visual learners (or really any non-auditory learners). The video for Week 2, Lesson 2, for example, had a single static image on the screen for eleven minutes. Words were added to the image during that time, but all in all there were 26 words of text on the slide. Really?!? ELEVEN MINUTES. 26 WORDS. Give me a transcript or make it an audio file. Don't keep me chained to my laptop watching a static image for ELEVEN MINUTES! The instructor droned and was clearly reading from a script. She did not even use the video to highlight key terms or spotlight key references. Whenever she mentioned a reference I wanted to look at, I had to either hope it was on the course reference page (many of them weren't there) or try to figure out how to spell the author's name based on her pronunciation of it. It was just really, really hard to get through. The tests were also poorly designed. What states do x y or z. Who cares? I don't live in those states. Which online school has this policy? Again who cares? Maybe a question about why states/schools have different approaches or how outcomes differ between states/schools, but memorizing a laundry list of which state or school has which policies and practices is useless and did not advance the learning objectives in any way. | added to the image during that | Time | but all in all there were | Positive | 0.84 | 2.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I've taken a bunch of Coursera Courses, and these were my favorite. Fun to watch and packed with useful stuff I wish I had known a long time ago. | wish I had known a long | Time | ago. | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I took this course as part of the Specialization. I wish I could put all the directors, VPs, and EVPs through this specialization. The tools, case studies, and resources alone make it worth the time and money. | resources alone make it worth the | Time | and money. | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| 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. | quality is good and the real | Time | examples are nicely explained. The course | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The part of course from Prof. Sytch and Prof. DeRue was really interesting and important. But I cannot complete this course, because part of Dr. Alexander is impossible to listen. It is necessary all the time to separate useful information from enormous amount of information about her private life. Is it a course about private life of Dr. Alexander or about Managing Talent? And I am 30 years, not16. She is talking with us like we are small kids, and so she can keep our attention only by special voice and multiple stories her private life. | listen. It is necessary all the | Time | to separate useful information from enormous | Positive | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The class gave a very good insight into the various aspects of Talent Management. It included very helpful tools as well as detailed explanations. A big thank you to the professors. Having worked in the field of Talent Management for quite some time I finally have the theoretical knowledge to back up my daily work! | of Talent Management for quite some | Time | I finally have the theoretical knowledge | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very well structured. Thank you for your time invested in this entire specialization. | well structured. Thank you for your | Time | invested in this entire specialization. | Negative | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| we5nljlYEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | the language was a little fast for me and i tried to follow by the subtitles.. the peer view is frustrating .. some we'll have hard time understanding the ideas, some will write in their mother language.. so have technical jobs and talking about it like another )???) word.. also, in the same task, some people will give high rate and the same question others will give 0.. it's frustrating as it affect the mark | . . some we'll have hard | Time | understanding the ideas, some will write | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| wEl1EleDEeWTbwotamPtlQ | Very good class about the history of a complex situation in Palestine. Teachers are clear, they don't take any side and we learn a lot. It's important to have a good point of view of one of the oldest and complex conflict of modern times. | oldest and complex conflict of modern | Time | | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| wEl1EleDEeWTbwotamPtlQ | The course was extremely informative and managed to explain complex circumstances very simple. I highly recommend this course therefore. I was able to learn new things about the history of Israel which were never brought to me like that by history teachers. Great opportunity to broaden knowledge. Suggestions: Although the course was very good structured sometimes sophisticated history terms in the context of Israel and Palestine occurred in a video and were explained properly one video later. But because they were explained shortly after and it happened only like three times I would suggest to have a little box with terms like Lechi or Palmach, White Paper from thetime they occur first right beneath every video. The interviews with the experts of each fields had sometimes an odd audio recording and one person therefore spoke louder then the other and I had to turn my speakers on full volume sometimes. If the course gets rerecorded one day I suggest to look into those samples in particular. Thanks for this great course. | and it happened only like three | Time | I would suggest to have a | Negative | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| wEl1EleDEeWTbwotamPtlQ | It is very brief but to the point. They run quickly through the development where more time should have been dedicated to such a complicated beginning. But it is truly neutral and academic for such a very sensitive subject. | quickly through the development where more | Time | should have been dedicated to such | Negative | 0.8 | 5.0 |
| wEl1EleDEeWTbwotamPtlQ | Very good class though at times it could be hard to hear some of the audio lessons | Very good class though at | Time | it could be hard to hear | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| WGJsi1UuEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Скучные теоретические выкладки, взятые из общеоткрытых доступных источников. Оторванная от действительности теория. Согласен с другими студентами, что вода. Тесты и задания абсолютно оторваны от изложенного скудного материала, и, складывается впечатление, что с помощью заданий собирается база знаний и проектов от студентов. Прошу прощения, но эти моменты очень не понравились. The course is not worth the time. Useless... | The course is not worth the | Time | Useless. . . | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Wi6g78WsEeWCSBJ1_yk7Tw | Excellent course with enough level of detail to accommodate for more advanced students, but at the same time, descriptive enough for students who are new to the topic to learn from taking this course. | advanced students, but at the same | Time | descriptive enough for students who are | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Wi6g78WsEeWCSBJ1_yk7Tw | I like it a lot. I wish though that this website was better flowing with the lectures. I have to refresh multiple times to make sure the video is where it should be...idk how to explain it. | lectures. I have to refresh multiple | Time | to make sure the video is | Negative | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | While I was primarily taking this course as a prerequisite for the next course in the specialization (which covers MongoDB in a bit more depth), I found this to be a well-organized introduction to a compelling framework. The instructor did a good job of presenting the content in a way that should be accessible for new developers, while still being relevant to experienced developers looking to round out their skills by learning a new framework. Acknowledging that this is a review of the course and not the framework, it's worth noting that Meteor itself is promising in its ability to quickly deploy sophisticated client-server web applications. My firm has well-established boilerplate templates based on Node.js and Gulp.js and a few dozen dependency packages that satisfy many of the same capabilities, but which were developed over a period of months and come with a much steeper learning curve. The scope of modern capabilities that Meteor offers out-of-the-box for "free" is quite impressive, and allows developers to dive into the interesting parts without the overhead of configuring services and establishing a build process. My only criticism is the cost, if you're looking to attain a verified certificate. At least from the perspective of a professional developer, the course was a bit light on content by comparison to other Coursera classes with the same pricing structure. I was able to complete the initial coursework in less than a week, while still attending my day job (although it did take additional time to complete the course project). Ultimately, this would be more compelling at a $49 price point, at least relative to other Coursera offerings. | job (although it did take additional | Time | to complete the course project). Ultimately, | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This is a nice course to start with meteor. At times seems little slow, but can understand as it caters broader audience with different background. Highly recommended for anybody who wants to start with Meteor. | course to start with meteor. At | Time | seems little slow, but can understand | Positive | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The production of this course could be much clearer and as such this is a very tedious course. The actual subject matter is good if you have some experience with JavaScript. The video is constantly switching between the professor and the code. As such, you'll find yourself constantly replaying certain parts to see what is typed. In some instances, the code is actually "off-screen". Is there really any value to seeing the professor (rather than just hearing)? The key information is in the code! Either leave the video on the code the entire time and run the audio for the teacher, or, add another window where the live code is visible the entire time. It's important that this is the live code. Simply providing the final product doesn't allow the novice user to see how it is built. | video on the code the entire | Time | and run the audio for the | Negative | 0.73 | 3.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | The production of this course could be much clearer and as such this is a very tedious course. The actual subject matter is good if you have some experience with JavaScript. The video is constantly switching between the professor and the code. As such, you'll find yourself constantly replaying certain parts to see what is typed. In some instances, the code is actually "off-screen". Is there really any value to seeing the professor (rather than just hearing)? The key information is in the code! Either leave the video on the code the entire time and run the audio for the teacher, or, add another window where the live code is visible the entire time. It's important that this is the live code. Simply providing the final product doesn't allow the novice user to see how it is built. | live code is visible the entire | Time | It's important that this is the | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | very good introduction to Meteor.js the real time application development very fast. Those who want to do full stack development without learning server side language can try Meteor.js | introduction to Meteor. js the real | Time | application development very fast. Those who | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | This has been a really awesome subject that has taught me alot in relatively little time. We need more introductions like this one please! A more advanced meteorjs subject would be great. | taught me alot in relatively little | Time | We need more introductions like this | Positive | 0.95 | 4.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Very clear, straightforward (no waste of time, no need to jump parts of the videos). I love it! | Very clear, straightforward (no waste of | Time | no need to jump parts of | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Was only videos and 2 question quizzes until the very end. I was very surprised by the assignment at the end as it was never mentioned in any of the videos. Almost didn't finish it in time because it was due right after Christmas. Would like more hands-on assignments throughout the course instead of one at the end. | videos. Almost didn't finish it in | Time | because it was due right after | Negative | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | A lot of stuff is just glossed over and not spent enough time on. | glossed over and not spent enough | Time | on. | Negative | 0.64 | 2.0 |
| wKPtohoHEeWwrBKfKrqlSQ | Really nice and exciting course. I like how with simple langue option a powerful result in less time than other frameworks. | option a powerful result in less | Time | than other frameworks. | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | Great course, I would definitely recommend. Information flowed smoothly and it was a great way for me to learn and understand my leadership style. The only reason I gave it a 4 star and not 5 is because during the peer assessment I kept being matched to persons who were in a different time zone from me which made it difficult for us to communicate. Other than that 1 glitch, thoroughly enjoyed the course. | persons who were in a different | Time | zone from me which made it | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | I am giving 1 star to this MOOC because giving 0 is not an option. The "savoir relier protocol" might be efficient when taught face to face in a classroom but as a MOOC it is a massive waste of time and money (I paid for the capstone project and I'm feeling robbed). I learnt absolutely nothing. This MOOC is a major disappointment from a school such as HEC. | it is a massive waste of | Time | and money (I paid for the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | Some good points. Spends a lot of time on self-advertisement. Takes a lot of time to get to the point. | good points. Spends a lot of | Time | on self-advertisement. Takes a lot of | Negative | 0.83 | 2.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | Some good points. Spends a lot of time on self-advertisement. Takes a lot of time to get to the point. | on self-advertisement. Takes a lot of | Time | to get to the point. | Negative | 0.71 | 2.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | a little too slow, and a bit superficial on the difficult pieces. I would recommend to spend a little more time on the fundamentals, and a little less on the anecdotes. | recommend to spend a little more | Time | on the fundamentals, and a little | Positive | 0.81 | 4.0 |
| 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. | books proposed because you don't have | Time | like me, it gives all the | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | very interesting and helpful but time coordination of yourself ist crusal to get along | very interesting and helpful but | Time | coordination of yourself ist crusal to | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| Wl5ych5kEeWFIxLDnS6_kQ | The best course I have seen to build a Leader. Valerie succeeded in discovering and teaching a very important skill for everyone in these changing & challenging times. A must for every one! Thanks Valerie for sharing it! Bravoo | everyone in these changing & challenging | Time | A must for every one! Thanks | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| wn9xfDvLEeWdUgozVKt3nw | Good But slowly repeated times | Good But slowly repeated | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Wp6z-dymEeWUwhJ351EtdQ | I enjoyed this course a lot! It gives a good introduction to the topic of real time systems, the lessons are well organized and you don't need to be a computer science expert to learn and understand the material taught in the course. The course not only teaches theory but gives you practical guidelines and very useful examples/assignments to illustrate how the theory is used in practice to solve typical problems and design real time systems , which is the feature I liked most about this course. This "hands-on" approach is very useful to the practitioner, with some inexpensive and simple hardware at your disposal the open-source software tools introduced in the course can get you quite far in designing your own real time system! Needless to say, no course is perfect and there are always things that can be improved. For example, the wording of the assignments and quizzes in this course is in dire need of an update/edit. | introduction to the topic of real | Time | systems, the lessons are well organized | Positive | 0.93 | 4.0 |
| Wp6z-dymEeWUwhJ351EtdQ | I enjoyed this course a lot! It gives a good introduction to the topic of real time systems, the lessons are well organized and you don't need to be a computer science expert to learn and understand the material taught in the course. The course not only teaches theory but gives you practical guidelines and very useful examples/assignments to illustrate how the theory is used in practice to solve typical problems and design real time systems , which is the feature I liked most about this course. This "hands-on" approach is very useful to the practitioner, with some inexpensive and simple hardware at your disposal the open-source software tools introduced in the course can get you quite far in designing your own real time system! Needless to say, no course is perfect and there are always things that can be improved. For example, the wording of the assignments and quizzes in this course is in dire need of an update/edit. | solve typical problems and design real | Time | systems , which is the feature | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Wp6z-dymEeWUwhJ351EtdQ | I enjoyed this course a lot! It gives a good introduction to the topic of real time systems, the lessons are well organized and you don't need to be a computer science expert to learn and understand the material taught in the course. The course not only teaches theory but gives you practical guidelines and very useful examples/assignments to illustrate how the theory is used in practice to solve typical problems and design real time systems , which is the feature I liked most about this course. This "hands-on" approach is very useful to the practitioner, with some inexpensive and simple hardware at your disposal the open-source software tools introduced in the course can get you quite far in designing your own real time system! Needless to say, no course is perfect and there are always things that can be improved. For example, the wording of the assignments and quizzes in this course is in dire need of an update/edit. | far in designing your own real | Time | system! Needless to say, no course | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| WQMNShxYEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | I have great respect for the lessons I am learning because many times we face challenges within the classroom and we always think that we must have the answers but I was humbled to realize that my very students who create these problems have the solutions. Dr. Francis was born to be a teacher, he shares these lectures with such joy that one can only be humbles to sit at his feet and drink in the wealth of knowledge he shares with us, only for you to want to rush to your classroom and be an agent of change. These lessons are for every parent and every teacher so that we can help our very own children and students under our care as well. Happy learning everyone. | lessons I am learning because many | Time | we face challenges within the classroom | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| WQMNShxYEeWP9g4JMjGIiQ | Waste of time and I did not learn anything from this course. It is basically 6 weeks of the "facilitator" asking questions without offering much in the form of answers. | Waste of | Time | and I did not learn anything | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | Interesting facts about the thoughts and ideas about magic in the medieval period and how it influenced the society in that time and even still influenced people of the 21st century. | it influenced the society in that | Time | and even still influenced people of | Positive | 0.94 | 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! | the assignments). Thank you for your | Time | and may you continue your wonderful | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | It was an incredibly interesting and insightful course, which opened up a lot of interesting avenues and ways of looking at medieval magic, the time and people and beliefs. The course was well organized, and the lectures were interesting and easy to follow along. I liked the course work with the quizzes and the written part and peer review as well. Thank you very much for the time and effort that went into this very cool and interesting course. | of looking at medieval magic, the | Time | and people and beliefs. The course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | It was an incredibly interesting and insightful course, which opened up a lot of interesting avenues and ways of looking at medieval magic, the time and people and beliefs. The course was well organized, and the lectures were interesting and easy to follow along. I liked the course work with the quizzes and the written part and peer review as well. Thank you very much for the time and effort that went into this very cool and interesting course. | Thank you very much for the | Time | and effort that went into this | Positive | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| WRmBJpeLEeWiKgp3mpfjeQ | The only reason this course did not get top marks is because very often the audio and the video did not match. Even with captions turned on it was, at times, difficult to follow as the captions follow the audio and end when the video ends even if the audio is not quite finished. Other than that I found this course enjoyable as well as educational. | captions turned on it was, at | Time | difficult to follow as the captions | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| wS6YM72kEeSuIiIAC0uZhw | I love that this is available online! I am returning to school after more than 10 years and I have forgotten everything I learned in high school so this is very helpful to me, to be able to re learn what I though I already knew and possibly correct my thinking. Thank you for your time into putting this together! | my thinking. Thank you for your | Time | into putting this together! | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| wS6YM72kEeSuIiIAC0uZhw | i don't no spanish and video is in Spanish. i tried hard to understand. Gujarati Language is not good. can I help to tranlation in Gujarati. I am Gujarati. I have difficulty in 8.1 .I have answered all correct answers.Somany times given only 4 correct answers. I am B.Sc, B.Ed with Maths. I have taught Maths in 10,11,12 th class. i will also join new course. Can you give certificate for Pre-Calculus? Any fees for that? Thanks. Jasubhai D.Desai | have answered all correct answers. Somany | Time | given only 4 correct answers. I | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| wsC6Z0BQEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | It's my second time to enter this course, last time I quit in the middle due to time conflict. Professor is great on explaning these basic family financial planning things. Grateful & look forward to more related courses. | It's my second | Time | to enter this course, last time | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| wsC6Z0BQEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | It's my second time to enter this course, last time I quit in the middle due to time conflict. Professor is great on explaning these basic family financial planning things. Grateful & look forward to more related courses. | time to enter this course, last | Time | I quit in the middle due | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| wsC6Z0BQEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | It's my second time to enter this course, last time I quit in the middle due to time conflict. Professor is great on explaning these basic family financial planning things. Grateful & look forward to more related courses. | quit in the middle due to | Time | conflict. Professor is great on explaning | Positive | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| wU9rptfZEeSQpiIAC2iNcA | A wonderful and resourceful course that could not have been for a better time. | not have been for a better | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| X-3RoamkEeWu-gqgbeGTiQ | The language is clear. The video edition is fine. The mathematical parts were illustrated fantastically. In my case , practice made master, meaning that I saw the videos several times and searched on wikipedia and googled words a few times. Maybe some ideas would've been better understood if it had been included the use of a special software such as AFNI or SPM, that's why I didn't give the five stars to the course. | that I saw the videos several | Time | and searched on wikipedia and googled | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| X-3RoamkEeWu-gqgbeGTiQ | The language is clear. The video edition is fine. The mathematical parts were illustrated fantastically. In my case , practice made master, meaning that I saw the videos several times and searched on wikipedia and googled words a few times. Maybe some ideas would've been better understood if it had been included the use of a special software such as AFNI or SPM, that's why I didn't give the five stars to the course. | wikipedia and googled words a few | Time | Maybe some ideas would've been better | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | First thanks for your efforts,I am very like your course ,because you give me a system of managing data analysis . At the same time you give me many thought .Expecting more communivating. At last thank you again ,expecting for your new courses. | data analysis . At the same | Time | you give me many thought . | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Liked how a lot of content was covered in a small amount of time. Thought the instructor was effective in presenting the important elements of the lectures. Only issue is some typos in the quizzes that were a bit distracting. | covered in a small amount of | Time | Thought the instructor was effective in | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent focus on what makes managing Data Analysis teams different from managing managing other teams. This course has the most impact if combined with general management background/classes. Speech fillers, like "um," "ah," "like," etc. prove distracting at times. | like, " etc. prove distracting at | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| X1RtV0EiEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Challenging at times, and worth the effort and cost. Very clear and well presented. | Challenging at | Time | and worth the effort and cost. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| X8YjHDowEeWnxw5wP_KHTw | Test errors, no answers from staff on forums, poor narration at times, audio scripts that do not quite correspond to what is being said... It needs careful reviewing and more user-friendly features being introduced by the organisers. | staff on forums, poor narration at | Time | audio scripts that do not quite | Negative | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Although the course was very useful, I couldn't complete the course due to an assignment. The assignment is very unrealistic and the graders don't give any feedback!! The assignment is open ended question and not difficult but took significant time, when I submit I was unable to pass. | and not difficult but took significant | Time | when I submit I was unable | Negative | 0.85 | 1.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | course is well worth a student's | Time | and effort. There are excellent presentations | Positive | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Gayle was an outstanding lecturer. I have little economics background and I was able to follow all lessons quite well. Videos were of perfect length, not too long. I enjoyed the graphs, etc in presentations as well as the questions in the middle of a video (to see if we were paying attention). Quizzes were very helpful. The big assignment with the simulator took some time but was worth it. It brought together all ideas and I think it taught me a lot. This was my 1st coursera course so i think the bar is set very high. | assignment with the simulator took some | Time | but was worth it. It brought | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Dear Professor Gayle Allard, Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge and time with us. Regards, | much for sharing your knowledge and | Time | with us. Regards, | Negative | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Please decrease the time between the retake of the quizz! I can't wait for 7 days in order to retake a quizz! | Please decrease the | Time | between the retake of the quizz! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Gayle Allard is simply an outstanding teacher. Strongly reccomended, this is my thirteenth course with Coursera. I've so liked this course the first time, that I'm doing it again. With IE Business I've attended "Critical Perspectives on Management" by Rolf Strom-Olsen, outstanding Too. | so liked this course the first | Time | that I'm doing it again. With | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | If you have time, it is a good course to start to understand how SEO works. If (like me) you work and don't have time, it can be a little too much useless especially in some parts of it. | If you have | Time | it is a good course to | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | If you have time, it is a good course to start to understand how SEO works. If (like me) you work and don't have time, it can be a little too much useless especially in some parts of it. | me) you work and don't have | Time | it can be a little too | Positive | 0.82 | 4.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Content is good but there is no practice whatsoever. So much theory can become boring at times. | much theory can become boring at | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Outstanding delivery - very engaging - amazing how much I learned in such a short time all while sitting at my desk during lunch hours | I learned in such a short | Time | all while sitting at my desk | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | The course focused too much on careers in SEO, and the required personality traits. SEO is part of many other career streams, so spending 1/2 of the course on SEO as a career was a complete waste of time for me. Did enjoy the historical walk-through of the GA algorithm, and the point to refocus on. Thanks | career was a complete waste of | Time | for me. Did enjoy the historical | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Good information presented, but I can't get past the outdated teaching method of using the first 45 to 60 seconds of each video to talk about what the video is going to cover, then spending 30 seconds repeating those bullet points at the end of each video. Some videos are 4 minutes long, so more than half of the content is not actually content, it is essentially the instructor reading the outline for the upcoming content. It's a waste of both instructor and learner time. There are errors in the materials, and since there is no instructor feedback/interaction, there is no way to find out what was meant (including in reading assignments). All you can do is submit a ticket to get it fixed and hope that it gets corrected for the next people who take this course. | waste of both instructor and learner | Time | There are errors in the materials, | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | A course offering the possibility to start practicing from the third week has providede me with a deep sense of purpose and increased my overall expectations of the Specialization. Having professor Rebekah May is also a blessing. She has been in the industry for about 8 years (I don't remember the precise amount of time) and that provides the subjects with a deeper insight from her personal experience. A Specialization to complete, thank you Coursera. | don't remember the precise amount of | Time | and that provides the subjects with | Negative | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | An evaluation is always tied to the value it provides in relation to the paid price. On the plus side: 1) It provides an interesting historical perspective of Search Engines, their evolution and the evolution of the algorithms and their purposes. 2) Rebeka May talks slowly and clearly. The transcripts also help in reviewing the contents of each lesson. On the minus side: 1) It is very theoretical and with no practical application. 2) Lots of terminology pops out of the blue without any prior explanation, and would be difficult to understand for a total newbie. Just as a very simple example, backlinks are mentioned several times. What is a " backlink" ?? I know what they are, but not everybody does. 3) There should be real support material, not merely " transcripts" 4) The Peer review does not make any sense. There should be a real test. The peers do not have a "higher" knowledge level to make an evaluation of the alummni. 5) It is not possible to take the quizzes unless you " upgrade" . Presently this costs $ 80. Conclusion: it is an interesting course, but at $ 80 provides no value.Audit the course instead. UC Davies and Coursera should provide this course free of charge or with a voluntary "donation" | simple example, backlinks are mentioned several | Time | What is a " backlink" ? | Positive | 0.81 | 2.0 |
| XEjjlXEkEeWhZxJhllGpHQ | Good intro to SEO. I felt like there was a lot, if not too much, time spent on the history of SEO and search engines, but otherwise, it was a well-structured course. | a lot, if not too much, | Time | spent on the history of SEO | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| XgJjBB9pEeWS6wrbVw_uEw | Although the topics are great and very interesting, especially because I am a teacher who face many of the situations mentiones, the videos are very hard to understand and I needed to put subscribe all the time. | needed to put subscribe all the | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| xg_cj6KwEeWiwAqQT7MHVQ | I highly recommend this course, with a lot of advises from real life, very clear communication style and with a real good sense of humor. There is no time for being bored. Excellent ! | sense of humor. There is no | Time | for being bored. Excellent ! | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| xg_cj6KwEeWiwAqQT7MHVQ | I think the Course has great content but there´s too many activities per week, most of the time if you don´t have time free you will loss the deadlines and after all loss the certificate. | activities per week, most of the | Time | if you don´t have time free | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| xg_cj6KwEeWiwAqQT7MHVQ | I think the Course has great content but there´s too many activities per week, most of the time if you don´t have time free you will loss the deadlines and after all loss the certificate. | the time if you don´t have | Time | free you will loss the deadlines | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| xg_cj6KwEeWiwAqQT7MHVQ | Without question the content is great, but the written assignment instructions were somewhat vague and did not match the peer review rubric at times (although the mentor did pin a few posts to address the problem). | match the peer review rubric at | Time | (although the mentor did pin a | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| XJUJYyzXEeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | While the last module of this course is very interesting and kept with the specialization, the first 5 modules are a waste of time for the most part. Why would I want to learn about AT&T for two weeks? The amount of useful concepts introduced in the first 5 modules won't take more than 15 minutes if unnecessary things were removed. | 5 modules are a waste of | Time | for the most part. Why would | Negative | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| XJUJYyzXEeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | You should rename it to 90s style history of comunication from Bell to nowdays with useless facts about it. I watched almost all first block but then I understood that I learnt nothing than I tried the IoT block, but it still wordy and superficial. Use more media to show your main ideas, take a class of public speaking and stop shaking a remote all the time you dont even use it. | stop shaking a remote all the | Time | you dont even use it. | Negative | 0.73 | 1.0 |
| XJUJYyzXEeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | Nothing to do with IoT, misleading title and waste of time, apart from several incorrections in the novel narration. | IoT, misleading title and waste of | Time | apart from several incorrections in the | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| XJUJYyzXEeWWqBIFfWmDPQ | Not enough conversation on IoT (Just in the last module). Way too much time spent on history that really doesn't matter and on stuff I can find on the net. One Module to run through all of these - Circuit switching and packet switching, computer telephony (SS7) and then wireless would have been enough. The remaining modules should have gone into the concepts of IoT in greater detail and some high level technical info that someone who is just hearing about it can speak intelligently on it without having to develop my own dragon board (next course) | the last module). Way too much | Time | spent on history that really doesn't | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| xL0drBU7EeWpKw4zIcjkHw | Great course. Do not forget to submit your work on time, otherwise you will not be graded. | forget to submit your work on | Time | otherwise you will not be graded. | Positive | 0.71 | 5.0 |
| xL0drBU7EeWpKw4zIcjkHw | I've had to guess a lot of things, video explanations were not up to the level of the assignments (I don't look for easier assignments but broader explanations).the last week assignment on crowdsourcing it's cool but for example Mechanical Turk take 48hrs to validate you before you could start, so if you start the assignment on friday you'll barely make it and if you had time until saturday(because you work) you are doomed. | make it and if you had | Time | until saturday(because you work) you are | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| xL0drBU7EeWpKw4zIcjkHw | It was interesting to learn via Coursera. My very first time online course ever and I enjoyed it. :) | learn via Coursera. My very first | Time | online course ever and I enjoyed | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Great experience! This course is really well structured. It have short but very objective lessons with really good take home messages. Easy to understand, and no time consuming. Congratulations to the organizers, specially to Maya Adams. I recommend this course to every one. | messages. Easy to understand, and no | Time | consuming. Congratulations to the organizers, specially | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's not a challenging course, but it is very informal at the same time. The interviews with the journalist throughout the course were my favorite parts because David was very detailed when it came to explaining how important food is a whole, compared to focusing just on nutrition individually. It's an introductory course, so I expected it to be an easy pass. Just take simple notes along the way, and you will pass the quizzes with no problem. Thanks Coursera and Stanford! | is very informal at the same | Time | The interviews with the journalist throughout | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This course was great for an introductory course to food and health because it emphasized getting back to the basics of real food and cooking simply. It lost a star because I felt like there were certain topics that needed a more in depth and less cursory approach. They were almost dismissive at times for the sake of "keeping it simple" whereas a simple suggestion about washing produce to remove pesticides could've been helpful. | approach. They were almost dismissive at | Time | for the sake of " keeping | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I am disappointed, from a place like Stanford I was expecting a real course in nutrition. This course doesn't teach anything. It's a mere half an hour a week of advice we should all already know, if we are interested in nutrition. I am quitting this course, unfortunately it's a waste of time. | course, unfortunately it's a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | The topics discussed into this course are really interesting. The videos give some perspective at the time of taking care of our own health and eating habits. The only problem I see, is the shortness of the course and the videos. The topics don't go beyond the surface and there is a lack of: details, examples, and comparisons between healthy diets and harmful ones. | videos give some perspective at the | Time | of taking care of our own | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Good course. It would be nice to have 1 or 2 healthy meal recipes at the end of the course as an example. I like that I can work on the course as I have time. The only downside is posting comments for each chapter because it is not an active discussion. | on the course as I have | Time | The only downside is posting comments | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I'm beginning to take courses on Coursera. This is a four week course but can easily be done in one setting. Great information and material that can be used for a long time. Easy to follow. I'm going to try some of the recipes that were mentioned! And it's FREE! | can be used for a long | Time | Easy to follow. I'm going to | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | very concise and informative class. And also the first and only class I actually completed since I started using online course ware like 3 years ago. Worth your time! | like 3 years ago. Worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very easy to understand, and gives you the most important aspects of nutrition. The focus of the course is for the student to understand how to make a balanced diet part of their lifestyle, and not rely on fad diets for short periods of time. | fad diets for short periods of | Time | | Negative | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's a good course, I wished it was a paid course with a certification (a diploma) with more number of lectures that one can study in his or her part time upto one year. Dr Maya, your teaching style is excellent. | study in his or her part | Time | upto one year. Dr Maya, your | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This course is extremely well made! I am enjoying it very much! I'm personally using it for a review of nutritional principles and basics and this course is FILLED with wonderfully clear and visually captivating video lectures cut into shorter 4-5 minute lectures! This course is probably meant to be taken over a months time, but It's SO Captivating that I can't get enough and be through it in a few days at most! Thank you for putting this course online for everyone to take, learn and enjoy! I'm going to recommend it to my whole online nutrition course at my university for an excellent review of basic and key nutritional concepts! It will certainly leave a lasting impression on my further nutritional studies. | to be taken over a months | Time | but It's SO Captivating that I | Positive | 0.69 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This course is less demanding than I expected/hoped, but nevertheless the content and its delivery was top-notch. The lectures present material in a clear and natural way. Course content is immediately and easily applied to daily life. The video production is the among the best I've seen in online education. Not groundbreaking, but immensely helpful to those unfamiliar with this material. Definitely worth your time. | with this material. Definitely worth your | Time | | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This was a very baseline introduction and basically a summary of Pollan's books and ideology. The positive is that is was very accessible in time and presentation however provides little insight to ins | that is was very accessible in | Time | and presentation however provides little insight | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's brief but quite informative. It organizes its content in a way that's both educative and entertaining at the same time. love Maya's style. | educative and entertaining at the same | Time | love Maya's style. | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very informative, short, and well worth the time invested. | informative, short, and well worth the | Time | invested. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This course literally changed my life. I have been trying to cook healthy meals, and actually have certain ingredients I always have, like lemons, onions, olive oil, and several others. I took this course at a perfect time, where it really helped me move more toward plant-based meals. Thank you. | took this course at a perfect | Time | where it really helped me move | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Easy to follow. A great deal of information in a short period of time! Excellent. | information in a short period of | Time | Excellent. | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | general and shallow, not very informative, could be inspirational for those haven't cooked in a long time. recipe are at the end of course. | those haven't cooked in a long | Time | recipe are at the end of | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very well presented course. To certain degree, the concepts are basic. If you're looking for a course that explains the physiological effects of sodium or the chemical reaction of glucose, this is not it. However, it gives sensible advice about how to eat well for a healthy life. I took away a number of good ideas. Also, the course helped me put into a wider context some things I already knew in a disjointed manner, which helped me to understand them better. Good structure, script, presentation (including interaction between the presenters), visuals... In summary, I feel following this course was time well spent. | I feel following this course was | Time | well spent. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I really enjoyed the course, but i found out that there is not enough information about such aspects as vitamins, minerals and what happens to them while cooking, what methods of cooking are healthier, which helps most to preserve most of the nutritions and why, etc... Nevertheless, I really appreciate your job and it was amazing feeling to spend some time with you because it was helpful and i enjoyed listening to your speech, voices and the culture overall. The knowledge will certainly be useful! Will suggest this course to my friends :) Kind regards from your russian student! | was amazing feeling to spend some | Time | with you because it was helpful | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It is a starting and refreshing point of view of how can we start to eat healthier without the feeling that we have to put a lot of effort, time and lifestyle. | to put a lot of effort, | Time | and lifestyle. | Negative | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very good course overall. It gave me some good thought nuggets to keep in mind for the future. At times the course felt more like it was trying to sell the notion of home cooking rather than being about "food and health". Sometimes terms were hastily presented and maybe assumed to be common knowledge, which left me confused in one of the quizzes ("serum triglycerides", for instance). The course touches on interesting topics that could've been elaborated more on, for instance how transfats are made. | in mind for the future. At | Time | the course felt more like it | Positive | 0.69 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Interesting and well presented information. I wished the course had been more interactive and had spent more time on the chemistry of nutrition. Also the lectures and quizzes could have been longer. | more interactive and had spent more | Time | on the chemistry of nutrition. Also | Negative | 0.9 | 3.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | This is a great introductory and time efficient course that allows anyone to get a brief overview of a healthy life style. This course, aside from the first video, does not go into the nutritional value of food or micro nutrient variables. So, if you'd like to get more information on how to cultivate your own healthy life style this is a great choice. However, if you'd like the more scientific side of things this course is not for you. | This is a great introductory and | Time | efficient course that allows anyone to | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's real time learning and mind awakening topics and learning more information contained herein . | It's real | Time | learning and mind awakening topics and | Positive | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Thanks for keeping the videos short, as to not have to deal long loading/buffering/streaming time. | not have to deal long loading/buffering/streaming | Time | | Negative | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Information is very straight forward and short, which is very good for people, who claim they do not have time. I think this course sums up and clarifies many things I watched and learned over the years in a very orderly manner. | who claim they do not have | Time | I think this course sums up | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent course. To get the most out of it, I recommend to download the transcripts of the video lectures and then add (YouTube) links to the pieces mentioned in the lecture. Time consuming, but you get a much deeper learning experience. | the pieces mentioned in the lecture. | Time | consuming, but you get a much | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Fantastic!! Really enjoyed the course Informative and enjoyable course which helped me understand the history of Rock/Popular music upto 1970. Prof Kovach's lectures helped me explore music and artists who I had long forgotten or did not even know of. This is a good course for both professionals like Dj's, student's as well as lay people like me who love both music as well as history. The only problem I had is that one had to do a lot of hunting on the net and that took a lot of my time. But it was well worth it because of what I heard and saw. The quizzes were sometimes too detailed and memory oriented. Maybe a more conceptual framework of questions can be considered in the future. Will definitely do Part 2 shortly! Thanks Prof Kovach and the Team. We are blessed by your effort and dedication | that took a lot of my | Time | But it was well worth it | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | You can clearly see that the professor is a passionate and has got a huge knowledge about the topic he is talking about. What he says is interesting and valuable, I also liked to learn facts about historical facts and anecdotes accompanying the lectures. I learnt a lot and listened to a lot new music. It takes quite a lot of time to watch all the videos, take notes (the exams are not that easy :) ) and listen to all of the examples, but it was definitely worth it. | It takes quite a lot of | Time | to watch all the videos, take | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent course, I highly reccomend it! Passionate John Covach makes it very thrilling and you really learn a lot. Do not expect an easy course, in the way that you have to take notes during the lessons - and even better, you have to take the aid of Youtube and/or Spotify or similars to really take advantage of the course. It takes time. | advantage of the course. It takes | Time | | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Hello. I really want to thank you to University of Rochester for this marvelous opportunity to learn without spending. I love music and rock over all that's why I decided to do this course first but I will keep on doing courses with you until I die. I also want to thank Professor Covach. He's very clear and accurate on teaching and his comments are very objective. Thanks so much for making me feel very glad. I've been enjoying this time so much for giving me a very clear idea about rock. Please keep on. I deeply thank you. My best regards. | very glad. I've been enjoying this | Time | so much for giving me a | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | This nice course helped me to understand the rock music in more systematical, organized way. The lecturer was very good, the visual part of the videos helped a lot, and supplementary materials too. The only disappointment I had with sometimes too specific questions in the quizzes, which meant that I must stop the video all the time to make an enormously specific notes, and this kinda spoils the integrity here. Nevertheless it was a great experience, and I definitely plan to go to the part 2 in the next year. | must stop the video all the | Time | to make an enormously specific notes, | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | This course was EXCELLENT! It held my interest the entire time, exposed me to so much music I had not yet heard, and I am excited to take Part | It held my interest the entire | Time | exposed me to so much music | Negative | 0.65 | 5.0 |
| xQHOMy81EeWPngoW78wA_Q | great work its about time we paid attention to this great ontininenti | great work its about | Time | we paid attention to this great | Positive | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| xRA5cxnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Excellent Contents for concepts explained with sample queries and assignments. It is really amazing to go thru all the new concepts within such a short time frame. | new concepts within such a short | Time | frame. | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| xRA5cxnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | If you have Oracle installed from previous classes, there is very little setup required. If not, give yourself ample time to install/configure it. Assignments take MUCH longer than the quoted 30 minutes. | required. If not, give yourself ample | Time | to install/configure it. Assignments take MUCH | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| xRA5cxnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Yet again, professor Michael Mannino presents a very well prepared course that achieves optimal results in limited time. in this course, he ties everything together from the first two courses and gives good practice with real world requirements. just putting these courses on my CV helped me to get my first job with Data Warehouses. and then i found myself well prepared for the challenges of my new job. THANK YOU! | that achieves optimal results in limited | Time | in this course, he ties everything | Positive | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| xtpKLngcEeWrAxJQXw-8PQ | wonderful course, clear assignments, informative lectures. of all the classes this one changed my writing the most. I thought it would be the most extraneous of the series. I thought the plot and character class would be more important but in fact, just paying attention to style helped the movement of my stories - it forced things to happen, it forced a plot, it forced a character to do things. Scribona's advice is practical - use more nouns and verbs, pay attention to how you describe the world through the eyes of the characters, learn how to edit and so on. He helped me finally get a handle the POV i use all the time in writing, but never really understood, and so I used it badly. Some of the other classes in the specialization were too heady, and not practical. But most importantly, Scribona's love for the written word was so apparent during the lectures that it elicited the same reverence in the students. | the POV i use all the | Time | in writing, but never really understood, | Negative | 0.74 | 5.0 |
| XupniISSEeWcSw7mZ7gPOw | The course was very informative and practical. I liked that it had case studies that needed working with others. However, if there is a way that mentors from the university could also grade the case study assignments, it would be useful. When I graded, I didn't look for the exact use of terminology but if my coursemate had documented the idea, I gave a positive grade. People could have a bias to the grading. At times I found people randomly added me probably to access the case study but didn't bother to discuss. In a future upgrade of the course, if the university can assign teams and track progress somehow it would be great. Perhaps limit the number of entries to each course and assign a mentor per few groups. I enjoyed it however and learnt alot which I will apply to my work. Thank you. | a bias to the grading. At | Time | I found people randomly added me | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | I learnt a lot . I am most appreciative of reviewers who spent a great deal of time reading my work, and leaving constructive comments. | who spent a great deal of | Time | reading my work, and leaving constructive | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | Script Writing: Write a Pilot Episode for a TV Course changed my life. I took several courses in Coursera at the time, but this was the most engaging. It really made want to learn and to achieve the goal of producing a final script. I recommend it to all who look for a real way to understand the process of writing for a TV show. | several courses in Coursera at the | Time | but this was the most engaging. | Negative | 0.75 | 5.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | Positives:- Good practice with the exciting world of script writing Learnt how to use the scriptwriting software Celtx.com Some aspects of the videos were helpful and instructive e.g. teaching us how to write a cold open Areas of improvement:- The beginner's course is entirely graded on peer reviews where one could get a range of divergent opinions on the same story, at times scathing and not constructive. Reviewers (who are purported to be beginners themselves) also at times give seemingly 'blind' grades without sharing constructive comments. The questions that you are graded on e.g. Do you feel immersed in the story? Is the story unique? are highly subjective and solely dependent on the reviewer's fleeting preferences. It would help if the questions were more nuanced and focused on the structure and technical aspects of script writing e.g. format, grammar, three part structure Lessons were too short and instructional (less than 10 mins of videos for each lesson) only for certain areas; it seemed like one of the major takeaways was to keep writing which is sensible but not helpful from a beginner's point of view. Suggestions:- To maintain some objectivity in grading: Mask the general comments section when a reviewer is giving his comments as negative comments from other peers could influence more negativity and vice versa. Give some guidelines on reviewing to prevent the grading process from turning into trolling. Would appreciate more helpful lessons with deeper content! | opinions on the same story, at | Time | scathing and not constructive. Reviewers (who | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | Positives:- Good practice with the exciting world of script writing Learnt how to use the scriptwriting software Celtx.com Some aspects of the videos were helpful and instructive e.g. teaching us how to write a cold open Areas of improvement:- The beginner's course is entirely graded on peer reviews where one could get a range of divergent opinions on the same story, at times scathing and not constructive. Reviewers (who are purported to be beginners themselves) also at times give seemingly 'blind' grades without sharing constructive comments. The questions that you are graded on e.g. Do you feel immersed in the story? Is the story unique? are highly subjective and solely dependent on the reviewer's fleeting preferences. It would help if the questions were more nuanced and focused on the structure and technical aspects of script writing e.g. format, grammar, three part structure Lessons were too short and instructional (less than 10 mins of videos for each lesson) only for certain areas; it seemed like one of the major takeaways was to keep writing which is sensible but not helpful from a beginner's point of view. Suggestions:- To maintain some objectivity in grading: Mask the general comments section when a reviewer is giving his comments as negative comments from other peers could influence more negativity and vice versa. Give some guidelines on reviewing to prevent the grading process from turning into trolling. Would appreciate more helpful lessons with deeper content! | to be beginners themselves) also at | Time | give seemingly 'blind' grades without sharing | Positive | 0.63 | 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. | both a lack of structure and | Time | I believe if the course was | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 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. | that the Instructor is barred by | Time | constraints (this is only a five | Negative | 0.71 | 2.0 |
| 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 class being so short; more | Time | to review = the option to | Negative | 0.78 | 2.0 |
| 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. | your own if you have the | Time | + desire to do so. Especially | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| 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. | dates are oddly crunched together (another | Time | constraint issue, I understand), but the | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| 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. | be receiving feedback before proceeding each | Time | Maybe in a longer course that | Positive | 0.76 | 2.0 |
| 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 Screenwriters Bible" is five | Time | more helpful than this course, and | Negative | 0.83 | 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. | not to waste their money and | Time | for this course. You'll learn a | Negative | 0.86 | 1.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | I thoroughly enjoyed this class. It gives you an excellent regiment and list of characteristics that would make your pilot and potential series desirable. My only real issue, which makes it 4 instead of 5 stars, is that the student feedback is somewhat limited in that not all students really understand how to give notes. Often times they are very vague ("good effort, write with move consision") not offering enough particulars to know what you should be looking to improve. But that's the inherent limitation of a course offered in this format. Not a reflection on the curriculum itself. | understand how to give notes. Often | Time | they are very vague (" good | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | Such a great course. Jumping in and just doing it worked for me, as I tend to spend time reading up and educating myself theoretically before ever getting around to actually writing. Seeing sample scripts and discussions of form and writing criteria is definitely important, as I have managed to learn a lot through looking at many scripts and comparing, so I think there's a place for that in the course, but the actual project base was what really made the difference for me. The grading criteria points with every assignment have functioned as vital checklists in which to review not just my peers, but also my own work as well. I really learned a whole lot more about stretching my limits and what I am capable of doing by actually writing than just by dreaming of doing it one day. My confidence is at an all-time high, and now I am actively revising the pilot and working on the following episodes, as well as actively seeking opportunities for further courses, contests, and screenwriter communities and associations. Thank you, David. Before this course, I never actually thought I'd do it, and decided to sign up on a whim because I love writing and I love film and TV, but I never even considered screenwriting as a career or an option, and now this has all been changed. I am forever grateful. Please come back and give more courses on the different facets of writing for the screen, like developing compelling characters, world building, genre tips, etc. Your support has been phenomenal. Thanks to Michigan State University, Coursera, and all of my peers for the amazing encouragement and support. | me, as I tend to spend | Time | reading up and educating myself theoretically | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | I really enjoyed this class. I would say that it is a lot of work in a short period of time. Also there were some issues with the peer review process. For example not knowing the criteria we would be graded on before submitting the assignments, many students unable to get enough reviews to move forward especially if they had to revise their assignment. Hopefully, this will be worked out for future versions. Overall, it was an interesting process. | work in a short period of | Time | Also there were some issues with | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | The instructor says in the first video: ”you do not need to read a book on how to write a script” – in my opinion YOU DO! Better to read a book or two than waste your time on this course; the videos are extremely short, shallow and a waste of time! | book or two than waste your | Time | on this course; the videos are | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | The instructor says in the first video: ”you do not need to read a book on how to write a script” – in my opinion YOU DO! Better to read a book or two than waste your time on this course; the videos are extremely short, shallow and a waste of time! | short, shallow and a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| XZomz77LEeWn1ApTWZT9Yw | I have found this course to be well planned out, easy to follow and very informative. I have been considering scriptwriting for some time and even bought books on how to get started but this course has been much more effective than any book. This course has given me the tools and the know-how of what is required to write a script. I am in my last week at the moment and the confidence and skills this project-centered course has given me are immeasurable. | have been considering scriptwriting for some | Time | and even bought books on how | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| X_ZG4rVzEeWq2A7HIftJ6w | Really enjoyed this course and I learned a lot. The content is interesting, engaging and informative. I now feel confident to get started on the graphic novel I've had in mind for some time, as well as starting a webcomic archive. I would recommend this course to anyone remotely interested in making comics. It's a great kick starter! Only reason I haven't given 5 stars is I was expecting it to be more compatible with digital methods of creating art. The course is structured to use hard copy printing and actual pens/pencils/inks, whereas I use a Wacom tablet and pen with Sketchbook Pro. So I had some fiddling around to do to access the course materials in a format that was useful to me. Also, the final week instructions seemed to be directed at a class putting their comics together in a compendium for the final print. I found it a bit confusing. | I've had in mind for some | Time | as well as starting a webcomic | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| X_ZG4rVzEeWq2A7HIftJ6w | An amazingly helpful course with plentiful materials to read, functional worksheets to work from, helpful and inspiring professional guest speakers and fairly reasonable goals for the time given. I'd definitely recommend this course for bot beginners and more experienced comic creators alike. | and fairly reasonable goals for the | Time | given. I'd definitely recommend this course | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| X_ZG4rVzEeWq2A7HIftJ6w | I had high expectations of this course, but must admit I'm pretty disappointed. Navigating the course feels unintuitive and clunky. Not sure if that's just a Coursera thing though. The actual content (video) looks great, but is unfortunately exceedingly brief, so much so, that it feels like this entire course could have just been a single article. In fact, there's not much presented that really benefits from the video format. Most 'instruction' in the course is centered around brief talks, or artist interviews, and thus you're often just looking at two people talking, or an artist showing you their work while they talk. You never even see anyone draw to my recollection. The 'work' in the course feels rather 'phoned in' at times too. Questions such as "What did you find interesting about the video you just watched?" seem unnecessary, and too elementary to contain any real value, especially when the videos are so brief. Having said all that, I DO think the people who made it are genuine, and have passion for comics, and comics education, and I'll continue to follow their efforts on that front. | course feels rather 'phoned in' at | Time | too. Questions such as " What | Positive | 0.75 | 2.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | I find the course very helpful. I'm a climate&energy officer at WWF but sometimes even I couldnt find enough arguments to discuss the silicon use in PV and convince people on fast developing PV techs. Thank you so much for introducing the world 3rd generation solar cells. Note: It would be very helpful if next time instructors can talk more clearly and show more examples.Thanks for you efforts. Cheers. | would be very helpful if next | Time | instructors can talk more clearly and | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Hi First of all I just want to write I have a background in mechanical engineering and I know the working principles of solar cells quite well. I just wanted to check out this course. I started this course but I find that it is very difficult to concentrate. I tried pinpointing exactly what the problem was and I came up with following: There is too much talking and not enough going on visually. I know you have a person in front of a white screen, and a few visual effects such as floating words and diagrams. It is just not working for me. I have a hard time remembering what you said. I can pause and go back again which is always nice but the info still doesn't stick. This especially true for the LCA part, which I don't even think is a difficult concept to grasp. I think the best courses I have seen online is not particularly rehearsed and it is usually just a guy, with a pen, running you through some examples to illustrate the working principles. Afterwards they do an everyday life example. I find that these courses always help me a lot. I am sorry about the 2 stars but I hope you see it as a room for improvement. It is probably a first time for you guys to use an online platform as a media so it will take a couple of iterations to get it right. I did like when you illustrated Isc and Voc in terms and abbreviations. More stuff like that, possibly also with an electrical diagram etc and som flow analogy. If I can propose anything it would be to organize it a bit more like Michigan Universitys Python learning series. I think it is quite good and the assignments are also challenging but you learn a lot. Anyway thanks a lot for the course. I hope you will find a way that works. | for me. I have a hard | Time | remembering what you said. I can | Negative | 0.65 | 2.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Hi First of all I just want to write I have a background in mechanical engineering and I know the working principles of solar cells quite well. I just wanted to check out this course. I started this course but I find that it is very difficult to concentrate. I tried pinpointing exactly what the problem was and I came up with following: There is too much talking and not enough going on visually. I know you have a person in front of a white screen, and a few visual effects such as floating words and diagrams. It is just not working for me. I have a hard time remembering what you said. I can pause and go back again which is always nice but the info still doesn't stick. This especially true for the LCA part, which I don't even think is a difficult concept to grasp. I think the best courses I have seen online is not particularly rehearsed and it is usually just a guy, with a pen, running you through some examples to illustrate the working principles. Afterwards they do an everyday life example. I find that these courses always help me a lot. I am sorry about the 2 stars but I hope you see it as a room for improvement. It is probably a first time for you guys to use an online platform as a media so it will take a couple of iterations to get it right. I did like when you illustrated Isc and Voc in terms and abbreviations. More stuff like that, possibly also with an electrical diagram etc and som flow analogy. If I can propose anything it would be to organize it a bit more like Michigan Universitys Python learning series. I think it is quite good and the assignments are also challenging but you learn a lot. Anyway thanks a lot for the course. I hope you will find a way that works. | improvement. It is probably a first | Time | for you guys to use an | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Had an amazing time learning. It was a respite from my mundane job. | Had an amazing | Time | learning. It was a respite from | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Thanks all of you who give their time to level us. | all of you who give their | Time | to level us. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Pretty hard, but you can really learn a lot from it. Make you time worthy. | a lot from it. Make you | Time | worthy. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | The course gave me a good, in-depth understanding of OPVs and how further developing the technology surrounding them could help solve the energy crisis. The material was thorough and the quizzes were challenging without being frustrating and encouraged you to learn more about the topics discussed. My only problem was that I was unable to access a community forum so a few times I was stuck on an assignment and had no way to find out information to help me. Instead I just had to guess and work through it alone which wasn't horrible but I would have like to have been able to discuss it with other people taking the course. Overall a good course that has gotten me very excited about OPVs and the future of solar technology. | a community forum so a few | Time | I was stuck on an assignment | Positive | 0.76 | 4.0 |
| y20FTlDPEeWMlwoziUhyxQ | Very nicely designed course, I have about 10 years of experience in Marketing Analytics and still found many very useful tools for analysis. The quantitative part (squash time :-) is especially impressive - two thumbs up! | for analysis. The quantitative part (squash | Time | :-) is especially impressive - two | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| y20FTlDPEeWMlwoziUhyxQ | While slightly difficult the professor did a fantastic job of adding humor to make the class more engaging. He started with the general principles of the course material to give us a basic understanding and then followed it up with with the reinforcing technical knowledge of the equations. My only complaints are the information comes at you very quickly and when complex requires rewinding several times to understand. Also I wish some of the work was actually linked to some analytic software to get a real feel for what the interaction would be like in real world situations taking the information directly from the dashboard and implementing it into a strategy. | and when complex requires rewinding several | Time | to understand. Also I wish some | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| y20FTlDPEeWMlwoziUhyxQ | It has great content. A good investment of your time. | content. A good investment of your | Time | | Negative | 0.82 | 3.0 |
| y8mxj203EeWbyw5d8C-Blw | In compare with first course of this specialization study materials are too few. Some lectures not longer then 2 !!!! minutes. The whole time of lectures 10-15 minutes | ! ! ! minutes. The whole | Time | of lectures 10-15 minutes | Negative | 0.87 | 1.0 |
| YcfRNRoCEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course as much content in it and it's difficult to have an holistic idea how it all fits together. Some videos are taught having the same problem like, for example, some tools/themes are presented without us knowing what they are for. E.g., Chi-squared test and null hypothesis. Only after a while we understand their use. This bring a lot of overhead to us who are learning. Some videos seem to have been re-worked over time and present cuts or jumps. As for assignments, they should be better worked because some questions are not clear or misleading regarding the criteria that you want to evaluate. For example, I already reported that in Question 2. and 3. of the assignment for the 3rd week. The example you give is a short introduction with two problems: 1) "I did the website", which can make the participant not to be at ease to criticize and 2) we're no evaluating the participant performance but the website. Next, you ask us to rewrite the introduction, which we do with those two problems in mind. Now, when we do the peer review we realize that you're expecting for us to rate the new introduction based on having "early prototype" and "user feedback". The original problems just seem not to count. Only by chance you can eventually write the new introduction touching the points that count for grading. | seem to have been re-worked over | Time | and present cuts or jumps. As | Negative | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| YcfRNRoCEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I didn't like the way contents were organized. It was too much information in a very short time. | much information in a very short | Time | | Positive | 0.88 | 3.0 |
| YcfRNRoCEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great for the first 2 weeks of class, the third week seemed really unbalanced though and all of the sudden was about 4x the amount of time to watch videos. I wouldn't have minded if the same material was spread to an extra week. | was about 4x the amount of | Time | to watch videos. I wouldn't have | Negative | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| YcfRNRoCEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course wasn't good. Many of the assignment instructions and questions were poorly written, and students clearly had trouble understanding what was asked of them. The assignments also weren't very deep or imaginative, and some of them requested very specific answers relying in keywords from the lectures rather than ensuring that the students had really understood the concepts. The design principles were introduced at such a surface level as to be just silly rather than useful. This was kind of a waste of my time. | kind of a waste of my | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course can be a bit dry at times. But still very informative | can be a bit dry at | Time | But still very informative | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I enjoyed this course and felt it to be a good introduction to Bootstrap. The time allocations were not realistic, though. I have a fairly strong (albeit outdated) background in programming and web design, but I still felt that I spent a lot more more time than what was allocated for learning. I imagine that this can be very discouraging to beginners. I am looking forward to the remaining modules. | a good introduction to Bootstrap. The | Time | allocations were not realistic, though. I | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I enjoyed this course and felt it to be a good introduction to Bootstrap. The time allocations were not realistic, though. I have a fairly strong (albeit outdated) background in programming and web design, but I still felt that I spent a lot more more time than what was allocated for learning. I imagine that this can be very discouraging to beginners. I am looking forward to the remaining modules. | I spent a lot more more | Time | than what was allocated for learning. | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This was a four star course and the links to additional information were a good resource. 3 stars for the discussions which were left unanswered much of the time and not a highly active mentor group. Much was left to student when stuck and exasperated options. | were left unanswered much of the | Time | and not a highly active mentor | Negative | 0.92 | 3.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I learned bootstrap from this course for the first time and now i'm a full time web developer and i'm still using the course videos to get my hand on some components of bootstraps. | from this course for the first | Time | and now i'm a full time | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I learned bootstrap from this course for the first time and now i'm a full time web developer and i'm still using the course videos to get my hand on some components of bootstraps. | time and now i'm a full | Time | web developer and i'm still using | Negative | 0.9 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | A very good course, working on one large website project. The lecturer talks a little slowly, but makes things very clear. Some of the review criteria for the assignments are wrong for example "div-xs-12" should have been "col-sm-12" , which makes fair grading difficult at times. | which makes fair grading difficult at | Time | | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | First, the assignments always had poor instructions. It wasn't until grading time you would find out what the criteria are. (After your assignment is submitted) Secondly, there was no documentation/help for the fact the Windows needs a webserver to run content in this section. (Many versions of Windows can't do this) Discovered/resolved over many hours, when course content would not work. The actual course content was sparse/not much to it other than "Bootstrap bootstrap bootstrap." After how good the first course was/how much ground it covered, this course was frustrating, poorly documented, and a disappointment. | poor instructions. It wasn't until grading | Time | you would find out what the | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good content, and covered a lot in a short span of time | lot in a short span of | Time | | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | At times the homework requirements are not well-detailed, comparing to the grading instructions. | At | Time | the homework requirements are not well-detailed, | Positive | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I concur with others of a similar opinion on this course: Assignment instructions/criteria differ from the grading rubric criteria. Assignments mostly copy and paste. Referring people to the Bootstrap docs as reference defeats the purpose of an instructor. Many of the assignments required you to do things against best practices, like inserting inline styles to make your element look like the instructor's screenshot of his page. The last week's content seemed to be a slapdash mix of bits and pieces, and trying to inform people about Node modules via solving a quadratic equation seemed really strange. How about an example from the real world, like even an e-commerce application? (In the comments on this, the instructor said there wasn't time in this course to explain Node modules, but that he provided a "clearer" example in the Node.js course. Hunh? Why wouldn't you do a simpler example in the drive-by assignment?) Instructor consistently mispronounced words that are CENTRAL to the field, which just seemed weird and made me question his credibility. This might sound petty, but kuh-rooze-zel for the word Carousel? It would be like a fashion designer mis pronouncing tulle as tull-ee or bias as bye-ez. Just not impressed. I am glad my employer paid the tuition and not me. The only positive was it enforced a schedule and structure for me to try my hand at Bootstrap. I had already worked with Foundation. | this, the instructor said there wasn't | Time | in this course to explain Node | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The tutor is doing great describing everything in a short, tight format. I had a great time understanding Bootstrap. It would be great if we had more exercises. A separate project, mirroring the one from the lectures and exercises. | tight format. I had a great | Time | understanding Bootstrap. It would be great | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Really the best!!! But It will be good if lecture includes some errors we can make and silly mistakes which affects results adversely. Jogesh sir is very good teacher and he is clear and brief in less time | is clear and brief in less | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was a nice time to do all these exercises and watch videos with all steps to complete the task | It was a nice | Time | to do all these exercises and | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | I really liked the course, and the way grading is design compared to other courses, even thought we should be able to take only some points off, many times it's partially well and would deserve only 1 or 2 points to be deducted, and we have to deduct all or none. thanks | take only some points off, many | Time | it's partially well and would deserve | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Awesome Course. One of the best courses , i have been part of on coursera. well paced, very rich in content, very good delivery of the ideas,. Assignments very good. A value for time i just wish practice quiz to have more number of question, and more challenging. A VERY SPECIAL THANKS TO JOGESH. THANKS A LOT | Assignments very good. A value for | Time | i just wish practice quiz to | Positive | 0.67 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great class, the professor has a rather interesting sense of humor which actually makes the whole experience more enjoyable. The assignments are challenging enough to make sure you learn, but are still doable within the allotted time. One recommendation from me is to use the same tools he uses in the videos (such as Brackets) as it becomes a bonus to get familiar with new development tools. | are still doable within the allotted | Time | One recommendation from me is to | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course was really helpful , it will teach you lot of things in no time . | you lot of things in no | Time | . | Negative | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very generous and clearly delivered content. Most Coursera courses only manage to scratch the surface due to time and attention span restrictions, but this one really tries to provide a complete overview of the many possibilities that you can explore later by yourself. | to scratch the surface due to | Time | and attention span restrictions, but this | Positive | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Nice overview of bootstrap and why css frameworks are used. Time well spent! | and why css frameworks are used. | Time | well spent! | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very good introductory course. You do have to be somewhat familiar with HTML, CSS and Javascript to get the most of it. The course is sometimes superficial, but it does teach you a lot in very little time. Great course! | you a lot in very little | Time | Great course! | Positive | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is the second course in the Full Stack series by Hong Kong University. Because I find the first course in this series very interesting (the assignments are challenging and easy to understand; the professor does a very good job in explaining the materials), I continue to take the second course, which is this one, a shoot. However, it is a complete disappointment. In every single assignment, it requires a file, which is built by going through every single lectures of the course. That means I have to go through every videos and copy his code to my code in order to get the file. If you have a lot of time, that is perfectly fine. However, if you are a college student like me, you properly will not be able to commit that much time. Personally, when I take a course, I take a look at the assignment and then see what knowledge I need to have in order to complete the assignment. Because of this, I may watch the lecture or just Google out the answer. Requiring a file in order to complete an assignment strips away my liberty in doing so. Furthermore, if you miss a step in the video, your file may very well be ruined and you need to rewatch the video again to see what you missed. Also, the course is extremely slow paced. I have to play back rate to x1.5 normal speed. Sadly, even with faster speed, the lectures are also poorly structured. There are many other materials online that can cover the same amount of information in less time and easier to understand. Combined with the required file for each assignment, this course can easily be a torture. | If you have a lot of | Time | that is perfectly fine. However, if | Positive | 0.9 | 2.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is the second course in the Full Stack series by Hong Kong University. Because I find the first course in this series very interesting (the assignments are challenging and easy to understand; the professor does a very good job in explaining the materials), I continue to take the second course, which is this one, a shoot. However, it is a complete disappointment. In every single assignment, it requires a file, which is built by going through every single lectures of the course. That means I have to go through every videos and copy his code to my code in order to get the file. If you have a lot of time, that is perfectly fine. However, if you are a college student like me, you properly will not be able to commit that much time. Personally, when I take a course, I take a look at the assignment and then see what knowledge I need to have in order to complete the assignment. Because of this, I may watch the lecture or just Google out the answer. Requiring a file in order to complete an assignment strips away my liberty in doing so. Furthermore, if you miss a step in the video, your file may very well be ruined and you need to rewatch the video again to see what you missed. Also, the course is extremely slow paced. I have to play back rate to x1.5 normal speed. Sadly, even with faster speed, the lectures are also poorly structured. There are many other materials online that can cover the same amount of information in less time and easier to understand. Combined with the required file for each assignment, this course can easily be a torture. | be able to commit that much | Time | Personally, when I take a course, | Positive | 0.82 | 2.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is the second course in the Full Stack series by Hong Kong University. Because I find the first course in this series very interesting (the assignments are challenging and easy to understand; the professor does a very good job in explaining the materials), I continue to take the second course, which is this one, a shoot. However, it is a complete disappointment. In every single assignment, it requires a file, which is built by going through every single lectures of the course. That means I have to go through every videos and copy his code to my code in order to get the file. If you have a lot of time, that is perfectly fine. However, if you are a college student like me, you properly will not be able to commit that much time. Personally, when I take a course, I take a look at the assignment and then see what knowledge I need to have in order to complete the assignment. Because of this, I may watch the lecture or just Google out the answer. Requiring a file in order to complete an assignment strips away my liberty in doing so. Furthermore, if you miss a step in the video, your file may very well be ruined and you need to rewatch the video again to see what you missed. Also, the course is extremely slow paced. I have to play back rate to x1.5 normal speed. Sadly, even with faster speed, the lectures are also poorly structured. There are many other materials online that can cover the same amount of information in less time and easier to understand. Combined with the required file for each assignment, this course can easily be a torture. | same amount of information in less | Time | and easier to understand. Combined with | Positive | 0.66 | 2.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Great course. Thanks for your time mr. Muppala :) | Great course. Thanks for your | Time | mr. Muppala :) | Positive | 0.63 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is the best teacher, you learn a lot in a short time. | learn a lot in a short | Time | | Positive | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This one is much harder and time consuming, compared to the first course of the specialization. Also, to receive maximum points for assignment, you need to think ahead and make things assignment don't ask you directly (like "removing the script if you're not using it, you'll receive 5 pts"). Good course anyway. | This one is much harder and | Time | consuming, compared to the first course | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Excellent course. Good preparation for the course by instructor, and guidance in discussion forums. If you want to learn a good amount in short period of time, this is recommended. Nice set of assignments that give you a feeling of accomplishing something with what you are learning. | good amount in short period of | Time | this is recommended. Nice set of | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course teach a lot and there is a lot of course requered and additional material. Everything is well explained and the instructor is awesome and funny. It is time demanding, but worth all the time you spend learning. | is awesome and funny. It is | Time | demanding, but worth all the time | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| ycQnChn3EeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course teach a lot and there is a lot of course requered and additional material. Everything is well explained and the instructor is awesome and funny. It is time demanding, but worth all the time you spend learning. | time demanding, but worth all the | Time | you spend learning. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yEfdpZz9EeWlGQ5Xb9b0kw | OK course. Difficult to follow at times. The assignments and reading make it worth taking. | OK course. Difficult to follow at | Time | The assignments and reading make it | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | 1) Not worth the money and time. The reason I say this is because the same concepts are reviewed and explained in lot more fun, creative, and interactive manner at other free of cost resources like Khan academy, youTube channels, etc 2) Who is the audience? I don't think instructor has any idea of target audience. Are these meant for novice or advanced learners ? 3) Why so serious? My philosophy is that if I want to appear in video, i better learn to cheer up. Seriously i mean after dealing with rush hour traffic and psychopath boss, I don't want to see a unhappy serious looking face throughout a course. Not good for my heart! Sorry if it is a mean (not statistic mean!) or anything but I have come here investing my money and time (out of my family time) . And I am not happy with this course. The only reason I have to complete this course is because of the requirement in specialization degree. I won't mind getting my refund back on this course. | 1) Not worth the money and | Time | The reason I say this is | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | 1) Not worth the money and time. The reason I say this is because the same concepts are reviewed and explained in lot more fun, creative, and interactive manner at other free of cost resources like Khan academy, youTube channels, etc 2) Who is the audience? I don't think instructor has any idea of target audience. Are these meant for novice or advanced learners ? 3) Why so serious? My philosophy is that if I want to appear in video, i better learn to cheer up. Seriously i mean after dealing with rush hour traffic and psychopath boss, I don't want to see a unhappy serious looking face throughout a course. Not good for my heart! Sorry if it is a mean (not statistic mean!) or anything but I have come here investing my money and time (out of my family time) . And I am not happy with this course. The only reason I have to complete this course is because of the requirement in specialization degree. I won't mind getting my refund back on this course. | come here investing my money and | Time | (out of my family time) . | Negative | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | 1) Not worth the money and time. The reason I say this is because the same concepts are reviewed and explained in lot more fun, creative, and interactive manner at other free of cost resources like Khan academy, youTube channels, etc 2) Who is the audience? I don't think instructor has any idea of target audience. Are these meant for novice or advanced learners ? 3) Why so serious? My philosophy is that if I want to appear in video, i better learn to cheer up. Seriously i mean after dealing with rush hour traffic and psychopath boss, I don't want to see a unhappy serious looking face throughout a course. Not good for my heart! Sorry if it is a mean (not statistic mean!) or anything but I have come here investing my money and time (out of my family time) . And I am not happy with this course. The only reason I have to complete this course is because of the requirement in specialization degree. I won't mind getting my refund back on this course. | and time (out of my family | Time | . And I am not happy | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | If, like me, you do not have an understanding of the subject matter then you may struggle to complete this in the time frame. I had to retake this multiple times and found getting the basics (From Khan) first then returning helped me finally understand and pass the tests. | struggle to complete this in the | Time | frame. I had to retake this | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | If, like me, you do not have an understanding of the subject matter then you may struggle to complete this in the time frame. I had to retake this multiple times and found getting the basics (From Khan) first then returning helped me finally understand and pass the tests. | I had to retake this multiple | Time | and found getting the basics (From | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Content was Great, difficult to understand some times. I had to review more sources to get the clearer idea. Totally enjoyed the challenge. | was Great, difficult to understand some | Time | I had to review more sources | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | good curse, but it's hard by short time to study all lessons and practice it. | curse, but it's hard by short | Time | to study all lessons and practice | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The topics from this course are very important and might be considered convoluted at times, so it is nice to see that Brian makes them actually easy to understand. Very comprehensive and has nice examples. | and might be considered convoluted at | Time | so it is nice to see | Positive | 0.87 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | this is heavy material, and I suggest it be broken down to two separate courses, and the author take his time in explaining the various concepts in much more detail vs. trying to cram them within 5 or 10 minute sessions. I know I wasn't the only one struggling to keep up with the teacher after week 2. | courses, and the author take his | Time | in explaining the various concepts in | Positive | 0.85 | 2.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course took me 3 weeks longer than anticipated, and I'm not sure it was the difficulty of the material. A lot of this information is review for me, so I am confused why it took so much time to complete. There were new topics, and I did enjoy working through the homework questions. | confused why it took so much | Time | to complete. There were new topics, | Negative | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Do NOT recommend. Very poorly explained. Refers to some concepts without introducing, introduces others without explaining. Spends most of the time looking to the computer screen instead of toward you and reading the text instead of explaining in understandable manner. | without explaining. Spends most of the | Time | looking to the computer screen instead | Negative | 0.99 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Content covered in this course was hard to learn, both because it was pitched at a level that realistically was more akin to a wrap up of content already covered (when in fact it was all new content) and because the instructor, Brian Caffo, has not a style that was conducive to teaching. The instructor often would launch into a topic, and then speed through a calculation with basically no explanation. In terms of time, this was one of the most intensive courses in the specialisation, and I'd recommend taking this course alone (not concurrently with other courses) for that very reason. | basically no explanation. In terms of | Time | this was one of the most | Negative | 0.78 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This is 3rd time I a trying this course. Labeling someone just reading the slides out loud as a course is ridiculous. I have to express that this is horrible, Please don't callout a course. Call it Audio Slides. I have a Master's degree in engineering and have won scholarship all my life. This is the first time I am trying out on-line course. The courses were okay till I came to this sections mostly done by Brian Jaffe. Knowing and teaching is two different things, Brian! I will continue, with help from other materials outside the course. But I have ti rate this as 1 star. | This is 3rd | Time | I a trying this course. Labeling | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This is 3rd time I a trying this course. Labeling someone just reading the slides out loud as a course is ridiculous. I have to express that this is horrible, Please don't callout a course. Call it Audio Slides. I have a Master's degree in engineering and have won scholarship all my life. This is the first time I am trying out on-line course. The courses were okay till I came to this sections mostly done by Brian Jaffe. Knowing and teaching is two different things, Brian! I will continue, with help from other materials outside the course. But I have ti rate this as 1 star. | my life. This is the first | Time | I am trying out on-line course. | Positive | 0.9 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | At times the content can be confusing. Some points are clearly explained. "Data Analysys Tools" course is a good complement in order to understand the subject. | At | Time | the content can be confusing. Some | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I get this course since I really want to learn on boosting. However, I think the course pace is too fast and should be include more 'non-greece symbol'. I have a background in biostatistic and epidemiology but I'm still having a hard time understanding lecture. I would say that this course is the most difficult among this specialization (practical machine learning is much easier than this). I bet many students will have a problem in this course since it's a 'beginner' level specialization. My suggestion is to 'slow down' , expand the lecture with more drawing/picture explanation, more r coding and get rid of those greece-symbol as much as possible. | but I'm still having a hard | Time | understanding lecture. I would say that | Neutral | 0.50 | 2.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The course was very dry compared to the other courses I have taken. Though there was a lot to cover in the four weeks but this was not best way to do it. The course covers a lot of concepts in far too little a time span. It should have been spread into at-least two modules. | concepts in far too little a | Time | span. It should have been spread | Negative | 0.98 | 3.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Taught very quickly and assumes a high degree of math fluency. Only take this if you are either very fluent in math already or have a significant amount of time to devote to understanding the material. | or have a significant amount of | Time | to devote to understanding the material. | Negative | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Perhaps I'm holding the video lectures to too high of a standard set by Roger Peng in previous courses, but the videos are difficult to follow. I can see the effort is clearly put in, but all the actions going on during the videos are distracting at times. | during the videos are distracting at | Time | | Positive | 0.66 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course, which is part of Data Science Specialization Course, which is a BEGINNER specialization, doesn't explain as it should to BEGINNERS. They try to explain, complex topics in 3 minutes ... If I didn't need the certificate, I would definitely not waste my time on this course. Youtube videos from khan academy or Brandon Foltz (Statistics 101) are much more valuable, you really get the topic and they are free. The professors didn't want to spend time preparing good material, from my point of view, the preparation is very poor. The course is more oriented to teach you to be a "data monkey". You know the code you need to write, but you don't get what are you doing ... Where do these formulas come from? | I would definitely not waste my | Time | on this course. Youtube videos from | Negative | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course, which is part of Data Science Specialization Course, which is a BEGINNER specialization, doesn't explain as it should to BEGINNERS. They try to explain, complex topics in 3 minutes ... If I didn't need the certificate, I would definitely not waste my time on this course. Youtube videos from khan academy or Brandon Foltz (Statistics 101) are much more valuable, you really get the topic and they are free. The professors didn't want to spend time preparing good material, from my point of view, the preparation is very poor. The course is more oriented to teach you to be a "data monkey". You know the code you need to write, but you don't get what are you doing ... Where do these formulas come from? | The professors didn't want to spend | Time | preparing good material, from my point | Negative | 0.64 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Homework, lectures, and the quiz are completely out of sync. Bayes rule is introduced and appears in the homework but no where else. Things appear on the quiz that aren't in the home work or lecture. This was put together from scraps of another lecture, but in an incoherent fashion. When Caffo tells the viewer that they'll need to use other resources, he wasn't kidding. I dropped this the first time when I kept introducing things that completely had not been introduced, took another stats class, then came back and aced it. I don't mind accelerated learning or using other resources, but there's guide for which concepts are needed and where coverage for them can be found. This leaves little recourse but to know stats already, or go learn it before taking this course. Otherwise you don't know enough to even go find the pieces you need. Incidentally, the dude who does the lectures for Khan Academy does a fantastic job and the lectures are a joy to watch, though some people might prefer something that moves less slowly and carefully and perhaps they would prefer something that glosses over the fundamental concepts more. If that's the case, I can't say enough good things about Biostatistical Analysis by Zar but thoroughly, logically categorizing statistical methods with short, clear examples, references to the original research, and building up one concept after another in logical order. The chapters are short, but the first 16 or so should give you a good enough foundation to deal with about any intro stats class. As it is, Caffo's presentation needs some serious testing and remodeling, but there's no indication that it'll match what Khan Academy did regardless of how much work goes in. At best, it's a bitter pill you can swallow if you already know the concepts. | kidding. I dropped this the first | Time | when I kept introducing things that | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I am left feeling this course needs work. I don't know if it's the pain of switching to the new platform or what, but the total lack of any support from the TA/instructor team is frustrating. Add to that the fact that Brian skips from slide to slide very quickly often not providing adequate explanations and you'll be re-watching the videos many times over. Several of the videos have blatant errors in them, like the fast that the fourth video of a week also contains the entire third video... again. Such things should not have passed a half decent QA test. More than anything this specialization should not be marketed as "no previous experience needed". You need to know some statistics. And by some, I mean do the whole thing on Khan Academy first. | you'll be re-watching the videos many | Time | over. Several of the videos have | Positive | 0.62 | 2.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I found this to be a tough class and had to take it twice, but it was worth the effort. It's tough if you're new to statistics. Starts easy enough but make the time to read additional references, articles, and online videos outside the course. | Starts easy enough but make the | Time | to read additional references, articles, and | Negative | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I think you can get a lot from this course, but you have to deploy a reasonable amount of time to find for yourself more in depth concepts elsewhere | to deploy a reasonable amount of | Time | to find for yourself more in | Negative | 0.64 | 4.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This is a great course taught by a clever teacher but... The content is presented in a very dry, not easy to grasp, manner. In several cases, I had to use external sources to understand the content and/or derive it by myself. When I finally understood the content I couldn't understand why it is presented in such a cryptic manner when the concepts are rather simple to grasp and the math not so advanced. Professor Caffo is a good communicator in some occasion (the module on Power for example was incredibly well communicated). But most of the time he just throw us some result without properly setting the context and concepts, as if it was understood that we already know most of what he is talking about. (Not the case!) I plan to make a document that follows the course module and fill in the missing piece of contextual information, derivations and concepts. But this takes a lot of time. If/when it will be completed, I will try to find a way to share it with future generation of students. Because, honestly, the content of this course is not so hard and shouldn't be! | well communicated). But most of the | Time | he just throw us some result | Negative | 0.93 | 3.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This is a great course taught by a clever teacher but... The content is presented in a very dry, not easy to grasp, manner. In several cases, I had to use external sources to understand the content and/or derive it by myself. When I finally understood the content I couldn't understand why it is presented in such a cryptic manner when the concepts are rather simple to grasp and the math not so advanced. Professor Caffo is a good communicator in some occasion (the module on Power for example was incredibly well communicated). But most of the time he just throw us some result without properly setting the context and concepts, as if it was understood that we already know most of what he is talking about. (Not the case!) I plan to make a document that follows the course module and fill in the missing piece of contextual information, derivations and concepts. But this takes a lot of time. If/when it will be completed, I will try to find a way to share it with future generation of students. Because, honestly, the content of this course is not so hard and shouldn't be! | But this takes a lot of | Time | If/when it will be completed, I | Positive | 0.63 | 3.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Explanations not clear and feels like he's reading rather than explaining things. Consecutive videos feel like they are disconnected. Videos stop in the middle of him talking something. Thank god for the swirl assignments which make things much clearer! Also the course proceed very fast not giving enough time to the concepts. | proceed very fast not giving enough | Time | to the concepts. | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| yFZxWd8aEeWDLBKS83bB7Q | This not the first time I attend in a coursera course but this English for Journalism course is really interesting. We have to finnish many tasks actively. It is not easy but that is how we get better. Thankyou a lot! | This not the first | Time | I attend in a coursera course | Positive | 0.67 | 5.0 |
| yFZxWd8aEeWDLBKS83bB7Q | I just started the course, but I feel like I am taking in a ton of knowledge that I have been craving to get for along time. Really happy that I have enrolled in this course. | been craving to get for along | Time | Really happy that I have enrolled | Positive | 0.79 | 4.0 |
| yFZxWd8aEeWDLBKS83bB7Q | The way the course is administrated and explained makes it a pleasure to do. I am just sad I do not have time to enjoy it at a steady pace and have to power through it on Sundays. | just sad I do not have | Time | to enjoy it at a steady | Negative | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| yFZxWd8aEeWDLBKS83bB7Q | This is I was waiting for a long long time! Thanks. | was waiting for a long long | Time | Thanks. | Negative | 0.79 | 5.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I had such a great time taking this course. Is the second I take from the University of Alberta, I'm sure going to take them all. The classes are comprehensible, with well made videos, and written material that's great to study later on, or before you watch them. This written material frees a lot of time on the class, as I usually take notes when watching online courses, this let's me concentrate on watching the material without having to pause over, and over to write down what seems important. Thank you! | I had such a great | Time | taking this course. Is the second | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I had such a great time taking this course. Is the second I take from the University of Alberta, I'm sure going to take them all. The classes are comprehensible, with well made videos, and written material that's great to study later on, or before you watch them. This written material frees a lot of time on the class, as I usually take notes when watching online courses, this let's me concentrate on watching the material without having to pause over, and over to write down what seems important. Thank you! | written material frees a lot of | Time | on the class, as I usually | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Overall good course, although at times narrow understanding of right answers. | Overall good course, although at | Time | narrow understanding of right answers. | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Very good course! Very interesting! I had a good time learning! | Very interesting! I had a good | Time | learning! | Positive | 0.67 | 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. | evauation. I screamed for help many | Time | but no one replied to my | Negative | 0.71 | 1.0 |
| YjCOKcQTEeWI6BLH_IXMZw | Very interesting course that provides a very insightful overview of the international energy issues. I like the way it is structured and how much of valuable information is given (taking into account relatively not big time commitment). I work in the electric power industry and I find information that I have learned during this course to be very helpful for my general understanding of the international energy issues. | (taking into account relatively not big | Time | commitment). I work in the electric | Positive | 0.76 | 5.0 |
| YjCOKcQTEeWI6BLH_IXMZw | The course is out of touch with reality and systematically underplays the Paris Agreement, progress of renewable energy and EU emissions mitigation, says absolutely nothing about climate science. At times the attitude is down right hostile and disgusting. Will share these observations widely. We are in a climate emergency and need to do everything we can. When I was taking this course, my city is going through severe flooding and the country is in yellow alert stage due to abnormal thunder storms. You should be ashamed of yourself for pushing this garbage. | absolutely nothing about climate science. At | Time | the attitude is down right hostile | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| yJFvuj06EeWBrBIWi3mmCw | Thats an excellent course. It teaches you really good different topics of oil explorations and government rules related to it. There are technical classes and economical classes. Excellent course to do if you have free times for 2 weeks. | to do if you have free | Time | for 2 weeks. | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| yJFvuj06EeWBrBIWi3mmCw | I have enjoyed this course immensely, thought due to some personal issues I didn't quite get to put the amount of time into it that I had hoped to. I found it very enlightening regardless and believe it has given me a better understanding of the environment which I work around. I greatly appreciate our professor, Coursera, and Duke University for having put this together and made this possible. | get to put the amount of | Time | into it that I had hoped | Negative | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| yn4BHt70EeWDLBKS83bB7Q | I signed up for Intro to Satellite Communications to learn about the industry to go along with a new job. The instructors did a fantastic job explaining the material and used a lot of good diagrams and metaphors to help explain complex topics. I felt I learned a great deal about SatCom, Radio Frequency theory, and internet protocol through this course. My only suggestion would be to help those of us who don't have a mathematics background to better understand many of the formulas and equations used in the course, as I struggled to comprehend some of these topics, but understood the general concepts. Other than perhaps "dumbing down" or spending more time on the math portion, great course, great professors, and I would definitely recommend this to anyone who is interested in communication. | " dumbing down" or spending more | Time | on the math portion, great course, | Negative | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| yO13mkySEeW_MgoxMAgbMQ | I enjoyed very much this course as a interdisciplinary topic with many very concrete examples from cities all around the world - especially from Scandinavia and rich partnerships with NGO and other organisations. I was a bit more time consuming than the previous MOOC I had followed because of the readings in addition to the video, but also what made the course very rich. | organisations. I was a bit more | Time | consuming than the previous MOOC I | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| yO13mkySEeW_MgoxMAgbMQ | Hi, I'm sorry to say that this course wasn't really useful. I had the impression to see dozens of INTRODUCTION videos about sustainables cities. Because: 1. In 5 weeks you have time to cover in details all the aspects of sustainable cities: energy, transport, waste, building, sharing economy. The condition is to focus each week to a topic. 2. It is too much based on powerpoint presentation and not at all on example. Concepts stay concepts: we didn't visit one single town, a connected building, an innovative waste management system. You quote 300 living labs, let's go ! 3. Pictures from the powerpoint are at least for half of them taken from pictures bank. Synthetic images, not concrete. Desapointing. 4.. Always the same example: Malmo, Copenhagen... What about the rest of the world ? 5. Videos from WWH and ICLEI are clearly revolting. Is it some publicity for them ??? This is not the place for that. In contrast, congratulations to Yuliya Voytenko, for her speech about sharing economy: it was clear, precise, focused. Please do your best to improve your courses: you have the knowledge, let's spread it. | 1. In 5 weeks you have | Time | to cover in details all the | Negative | 0.84 | 1.0 |
| yO13mkySEeW_MgoxMAgbMQ | Overall good course (the first MOOC I ever took, so inexperienced in grading these courses), but some areas of improvement remain. I would however suggest less redundancy. Too many papers/videos start with an overview of the problems we are facing, but I would think most students are aware of these problems coming into the course, and if not, they need not be repeated so many times. Also, some of the papers seem to use a very redundant and roundabout way of communicating information, with a lot of repetition and sometimes over-contextualization. Shorter sentences/readability do not make for worse science. :-) | need not be repeated so many | Time | Also, some of the papers seem | Positive | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | I had really enjoyed time to have this course because it was very knowledgeable and professional. Many thanks!!! | I had really enjoyed | Time | to have this course because it | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | This is very help full course for beginners. It is really worth for the time. i strongly encourage this course | It is really worth for the | Time | i strongly encourage this course | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| YOH__fNOEeSbSyIACxeWxg | In my opinion this is a very recommendable course. It's worth all the time one spend with it. The explanations are very good an also understandable for non-native english speakers. One gets ideas how to avoid pitfalls and, why some steps that are requested by the bosses at the very first moment ("how much, how long") must not be answered before other steps (mainly WBS) is done. | recommendable course. It's worth all the | Time | one spend with it. The explanations | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | A really great course, you should definitely take this second after Algorithmic Toolbox, as that has an easier learning curve for the very 'CS professor' style code (lots of single letter variables and other quirks) and how projects should be submitted and tested. That said, there is a lot of good learning in this course. Make sure you have some good Algorithms textbooks to accompany the lectures, they have recommendations in the course. I personally use Sedgewick's book and CLRS which aren't exactly what they suggest, but work well. Take your time with the learning, make sure you really understand the concepts before moving on to the homework. Use multiple sources to learn (they provide plenty of links!) and you'll do well. In response to a very politely asked request for clarity: I rated this 4/5 rather than 5/5 stars as I found that for my preferred language (Python) some of the starter files were very poorly created. This meant I often have to rewrite the initial parsing of the inputs because it would create variables that contained incorrect or incomplete input data. Further, there were some non-harmful quirks like semi-colons or parameters shadowing Python reserved words in the code. The next course in this series, Algorithms on Graphs, did not seem to have any of these issues, though! | suggest, but work well. Take your | Time | with the learning, make sure you | Negative | 0.73 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The last two weeks felt rushed. The Binary Search Tree/AVL Tree module doesn't have a quiz or an assignment and it's easy to move on without fully understanding both data structures. This allows for wasting time on the last assignment which relies on understanding AVL trees. I recommend reading the external resources for each lesson and making sure you have a grasp of the data structure before moving to the next module. | data structures. This allows for wasting | Time | on the last assignment which relies | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The optional videos are not allotted enough time. Those concepts are difficult to grasp. | optional videos are not allotted enough | Time | Those concepts are difficult to grasp. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | All in all a great and challenging course. A big thank you to all the teachers! I especially liked the assignments as completing them forced me to think about all the little details and edge cases. A few observations/constructive criticisms: - While the first 3 weeks had almost everything explained rigorously, including complete, usable pseudo codes, the last 2 weeks had lots of holes in terms of details. I think it is down to the fact that it covered a lot, however, pseudo codes suddenly became very high level, to the point where a 5 liner translated to ~100 lines of real code. This in terms meant that learners had to do quite a bit of additional research about the nitty-gritty. Nevertheless I thoroughly enjoyed this extra research, just be mindful about the extra time required. - There are languages with first class support, namely C++, Java and Python3, which means there are starter files supplied. If you choose a different, supported language then be prepared that you have to implement everything from scratch, which again mean extra time, although I would argue that you will learn more, especially in the last 2 weeks. - Forums seemed to be more active in the past, especially with regards to teacher contribution. Be prepared to be self-reliant and able to come up with answers to your own questions. | just be mindful about the extra | Time | required. - There are languages with | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | All in all a great and challenging course. A big thank you to all the teachers! I especially liked the assignments as completing them forced me to think about all the little details and edge cases. A few observations/constructive criticisms: - While the first 3 weeks had almost everything explained rigorously, including complete, usable pseudo codes, the last 2 weeks had lots of holes in terms of details. I think it is down to the fact that it covered a lot, however, pseudo codes suddenly became very high level, to the point where a 5 liner translated to ~100 lines of real code. This in terms meant that learners had to do quite a bit of additional research about the nitty-gritty. Nevertheless I thoroughly enjoyed this extra research, just be mindful about the extra time required. - There are languages with first class support, namely C++, Java and Python3, which means there are starter files supplied. If you choose a different, supported language then be prepared that you have to implement everything from scratch, which again mean extra time, although I would argue that you will learn more, especially in the last 2 weeks. - Forums seemed to be more active in the past, especially with regards to teacher contribution. Be prepared to be self-reliant and able to come up with answers to your own questions. | from scratch, which again mean extra | Time | although I would argue that you | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | I'm honestly quite pissed. The material itself is fine but I have had a terrible experience working with the instructors. I don't think I will continue taking these courses. I don't appreciate the amount of time and effort given into the programming assignments only to receive practically zero help. First of all, I don't know WHY I'm failing the test cases, I just am. Your program runs through maybe 100 tests to ensure correctness but somehow the instructors decide you should only see the first 3. But then, I try posting on the forums to receive help only to have it removed. Quite frankly, I have spent well over 10 hours at this point on a single problem and I've created my own tests and I have looked at all the very vague hints given in the forums and I still have no clue what to do. I have school, a job, and yet I'm losing all this productivity because I'm running all these damn tests hoping on the off-chance that I catch whatever weird bug it is that's failing my code. All I want is real, concrete feedback. | I don't appreciate the amount of | Time | and effort given into the programming | Negative | 0.95 | 1.0 |
| 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. | in this specialization at the same | Time | I did not know that and | Positive | 0.84 | 5.0 |
| 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. | on two courses at the same | Time | until the instructor informed me about | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | This course is very helpful, especially for its assignment. You must pass the time and memory constraints which will help your thinking of how to improve algorithms. | its assignment. You must pass the | Time | and memory constraints which will help | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | Similar to the first course in this Specialization, a great course on algorithms and their applications. Frustrating at times, but I definitely recommend this course (and the others) if you are serious about implementing algorithms for whatever purpose. | algorithms and their applications. Frustrating at | Time | but I definitely recommend this course | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | Structures are started at the same | Time | It was difficult to find out | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | was difficult to find out the | Time | for both courses and spend enough | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | I always wanted to improve the algorithms and data structures field. The books wasn't so efficient. Especially they weren't so practical. These courses are the first courses where I really got a lot of knowledge. Especially because of assignments. All lectors are very good in explanation of the material and tell many additional useful things. These courses are the really good base, after which you can open the books related to algorithms and read more details if you needed. I am definitely going to complete the whole specialization! The only thing which was not convenient for me is that both courses Algorithmic Toolbox and Data Structures are started at the same time. It was difficult to find out the time for both courses and spend enough time to solve all assignments instead of only enough for passing. Anyway, now I am started the second iteration of the course and I am going to solve all assignments which I skipped. Big thanks to Daniel, Alex, Pavel, Neil and Mike! Regards, Sergey | for both courses and spend enough | Time | to solve all assignments instead of | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The structure of the class follows the regular academic model you'll find in college: lecture -> lecture -> lecture -> assignment... repeat. I don't think this model is suitable for online delivery. Without discussion and the ability to interrupt and ask questions, the lectures are at times a more frustrating than useful (especially with Coursera's user interface, which lacks quick rewind and is generally speaking rather poorly thought out). For many of the topics, better videos exist online (try safari or pluralsight). As for the problems, they were the main source of learning, but were also at times a bit frustrating (the splay trees starter code was rather sad to look at). I find that hacker rank is probably better at delivering value (if you can forego the warm fuzzy feeling you get from getting a verified certificate, you'll probably be better served by practicing on hacker rank than from doing the problems in this course). | ask questions, the lectures are at | Time | a more frustrating than useful (especially | Positive | 0.67 | 3.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The structure of the class follows the regular academic model you'll find in college: lecture -> lecture -> lecture -> assignment... repeat. I don't think this model is suitable for online delivery. Without discussion and the ability to interrupt and ask questions, the lectures are at times a more frustrating than useful (especially with Coursera's user interface, which lacks quick rewind and is generally speaking rather poorly thought out). For many of the topics, better videos exist online (try safari or pluralsight). As for the problems, they were the main source of learning, but were also at times a bit frustrating (the splay trees starter code was rather sad to look at). I find that hacker rank is probably better at delivering value (if you can forego the warm fuzzy feeling you get from getting a verified certificate, you'll probably be better served by practicing on hacker rank than from doing the problems in this course). | of learning, but were also at | Time | a bit frustrating (the splay trees | Positive | 0.84 | 3.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | not available is extremely frustrating and | Time | consuming. I absolutely disagree with the | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | Hi, Learning new complex things is | Time | consuming, it is essential, and it | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | and it is ok. Without this | Time | spent you wouldn't have learned even | Negative | 0.97 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | what you said that this needs | Time | and I do not mind spending | Negative | 0.72 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | and I do not mind spending | Time | learning new things. That is why | Negative | 0.8 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | sets misplaces the balance where this | Time | is being spend. Let me give | Positive | 0.77 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | presented. I do not mind spending | Time | developing solutions to the assignments. I | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| yOZEQ3lwEeWb-BLhFdaGww | The fact that test cases are not available is extremely frustrating and time consuming. I absolutely disagree with the instructors about the reason why test cases are hidden. Michael Levin Hi, Learning new complex things is time consuming, it is essential, and it is ok. Without this time spent you wouldn't have learned even half of what you've learned while trying to find your mistakes yourself. Also, the testing techniques presented here are indispensable in the real life, and many learners of the Algorithmic Toolbox course have already confirmed this Hello Mr. Levin, First please forgive me for communicating with you in this place. I am not sure if there is a direct way to answer you, but I believe you will have access to my response. I entirely agree with what you said that this needs time and I do not mind spending time learning new things. That is why I am here in the first place. But I think that hiding the test sets misplaces the balance where this time is being spend. Let me give you an example: week 3 – hash chains - assignment no. 2. I wrote the app, submitted this and it failed on test no. 5. Having generated tons of test cases I was nowhere closer as all looked good, but still failed your engine. As it turned out the problem was not with the algorithm implemented but with the presentation layer. ‘Check x’ command when x is not found in the hash table should return blank line and my program returned nothing. I could not find this in the specification hence lots of hours trying to figure out the solution. It was not a bug with the program, it was the problem how the data is presented. I do not mind spending time developing solutions to the assignments. I would love if there were more advanced (even optional) problems to solve but I want to spend this time on the algorithm and solving the task rather than trying to figure out how to display the data. Please, do not get me wrong, I absolutely adore the course, lectures are brilliant and my opinion should be regarded as a constructive criticism even if you do not agree with me. Thank you again for what you are doing. Regards, Marcin | but I want to spend this | Time | on the algorithm and solving the | Negative | 0.91 | 4.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | This is the second time I take the course. Amazing! Thanks Gary! | This is the second | Time | I take the course. Amazing! Thanks | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | Excellent and Challenging! Learnt a lot and if you are working toward a certificate you really need to set aside time to earn a pass for each assignment. Few glitches when it came to grading and assignment instructions. BUT the discussion board is really helpful and interactive. The TA's also provide timely help. | you really need to set aside | Time | to earn a pass for each | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | Magnificent Class! But I'm just a newbie to Jazz so it takes time to absorb the material! | newbie to Jazz so it takes | Time | to absorb the material! | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | A lot of great insight and knowledge here; well worth the time. I almost didn't give it five stars, because I feel that they could have made room for just a bit more explanation and just a few more examples of the topics covered. Some of this is heady stuff, and doesn't benefit from being glossed over. Regardless, what you DO get out of this course is well worth the effort. Put in the time, and you'll be rewarded. | and knowledge here; well worth the | Time | I almost didn't give it five | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| ypgDPuPQEeSyBSIAC9REKg | A lot of great insight and knowledge here; well worth the time. I almost didn't give it five stars, because I feel that they could have made room for just a bit more explanation and just a few more examples of the topics covered. Some of this is heady stuff, and doesn't benefit from being glossed over. Regardless, what you DO get out of this course is well worth the effort. Put in the time, and you'll be rewarded. | worth the effort. Put in the | Time | and you'll be rewarded. | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | Did this course second time but still felt i learned a lot new. Amazing work in creating the course so educative and structured. | Did this course second | Time | but still felt i learned a | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | The course lost a lot without tests. Theory is great. Assignments are pain in the azz - too much is assumed here and there. You must resubmit like a dozen of times to figure out what is wrong. | must resubmit like a dozen of | Time | to figure out what is wrong. | Negative | 0.97 | 3.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | I really liked the videos and the lecture slides. I think the assignments were really good as well, but had the feeling sometimes small but important informations were missing or not placed well enough. I read the description for the 8puzzle half a dozen times, but that this is not actually solving the task in the optimal amount of moves but rather in some arbitrary amount of moves (we just output the optimal moves) somehow escaped my attention. | for the 8puzzle half a dozen | Time | but that this is not actually | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | I enrolled this course last year and quit at week 3. But I finished it this time and it's the first CS MOOC I finished. It's a really hard but really worthful six-week. It led me into the world of algorithm and helped me improved my English a lot. Thanks to Sedgewick's gorgeous lectures, Wayne's patient answers at Discuss forum and every fellows participate this course. | 3. But I finished it this | Time | and it's the first CS MOOC | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | It was an amazing experience. Many thanks for such a good theoretical information and challenging practice. Every single time I had one question - can I do better. Knowledge obtained from this course is outstanding. Thank you again | information and challenging practice. Every single | Time | I had one question - can | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yQcuJCOcEeagwg7hVay0BQ | I'm taking this for the second time to strengthen my knowledge. The course is one of the best I've taking online in the past few years. This is one of the courses I would pay money for because it is very valuable to me. | I'm taking this for the second | Time | to strengthen my knowledge. The course | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| YUAc977OEeWk7gqXCJNO4w | I really liked this course. I think there was a lot of content covered in a short period of time and the way that it was presented kept me focused. I think the professor was able to present the information in an effective way. I would definitely recommend this course. | covered in a short period of | Time | and the way that it was | Negative | 0.72 | 5.0 |
| yVldYUd5EeWb5ArkqfgJBw | Good course, just publish what hardware is needed ahead of time not at the beginning of the first week! | what hardware is needed ahead of | Time | not at the beginning of the | Negative | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The course lectures were too sparse leading up to the final, very important assignment of learning to how to create an ETL package. More time and energy should have been spent on the technical aspects of the Pentaho Spoon program, rather than doing overviews of application pros and cons. | to create an ETL package. More | Time | and energy should have been spent | Negative | 0.94 | 2.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | quite challenging, high paced lectures. It seems like an easy course because the lectures are quite brief, but make no mistake, there is no repeating of concepts or endless bla bla. To succeed in the assignments one is very likely to watch lectures again. Without any previous knowledge in this subject it is almost impossible to grasp everything by just watching the videos due to the new vocabulary and the information density. The assignments definetly take more time than indicated. | density. The assignments definetly take more | Time | than indicated. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I think this course is great, however weeks 2 and 3 should be restructured to ensure students acknowledge topics properly. I had a bad time solving those week's asignments. | topics properly. I had a bad | Time | solving those week's asignments. | Negative | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Again, professor Michael Mannino presents a very well prepared course that achieves optimal results in limited time. This course provides the background and basic skills necessary understand and work with Data Warehouses. | that achieves optimal results in limited | Time | This course provides the background and | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Awful. Just awful. There are dozens of students trying to install Pentaho and failing. Only reason I managed is that I have prior experience with the software. There are no TAs, no help, nothing. The Quiz is a scam designed to force you to shell out even more money of the so-called-optional textbook, and the assignments are extremely vague and orders of magnitude beyond the laughable 30 minutes the instructor suggested they should take. My submissions for week 3 total over 30 pages -- and I work a full time job... Avoid this class, do not reward terrible courses with your cash. | -- and I work a full | Time | job. . . Avoid this class, | Negative | 0.97 | 1.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I like the course, and I learn a lot (having plenty of experience already). However, the assignments take far more time than the quoted 30 minutes, and a lot of time is spent installing and getting open-source tools to work - which I would have rather spent on actually hands on work on the subject-matter. | However, the assignments take far more | Time | than the quoted 30 minutes, and | Negative | 0.98 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | I like the course, and I learn a lot (having plenty of experience already). However, the assignments take far more time than the quoted 30 minutes, and a lot of time is spent installing and getting open-source tools to work - which I would have rather spent on actually hands on work on the subject-matter. | 30 minutes, and a lot of | Time | is spent installing and getting open-source | Negative | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructions for installing the software are not very intuitive and can be very frustrating at times, so make sure to allot additional time getting it installed. The assignment time listed is FAR less than the amount of time to complete the assignment, again, make sure to allot additional time for completing the assignments. | and can be very frustrating at | Time | so make sure to allot additional | Positive | 0.94 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructions for installing the software are not very intuitive and can be very frustrating at times, so make sure to allot additional time getting it installed. The assignment time listed is FAR less than the amount of time to complete the assignment, again, make sure to allot additional time for completing the assignments. | so make sure to allot additional | Time | getting it installed. The assignment time | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructions for installing the software are not very intuitive and can be very frustrating at times, so make sure to allot additional time getting it installed. The assignment time listed is FAR less than the amount of time to complete the assignment, again, make sure to allot additional time for completing the assignments. | time getting it installed. The assignment | Time | listed is FAR less than the | Negative | 0.68 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructions for installing the software are not very intuitive and can be very frustrating at times, so make sure to allot additional time getting it installed. The assignment time listed is FAR less than the amount of time to complete the assignment, again, make sure to allot additional time for completing the assignments. | FAR less than the amount of | Time | to complete the assignment, again, make | Negative | 0.88 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructions for installing the software are not very intuitive and can be very frustrating at times, so make sure to allot additional time getting it installed. The assignment time listed is FAR less than the amount of time to complete the assignment, again, make sure to allot additional time for completing the assignments. | again, make sure to allot additional | Time | for completing the assignments. | Positive | 0.63 | 4.0 |
| yWjlOBnoEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | Solid class overall, however video lectures do not provide enough background info to complete some of the assignments. Expect to spend much more time than the estimated 30 mins to complete. | assignments. Expect to spend much more | Time | than the estimated 30 mins to | Negative | 0.83 | 4.0 |
| ywoUFzVxEeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Everthing is interesting about this specialisation, this is my fifth coruse and I am so glad that I have invested my time in this. | glad that I have invested my | Time | in this. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| yXMpEJw3EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | Great Course ! Aspirant Entrepreneurs many times make mistakes in the Innovative companies financial planning, This is great Course to Think about Financial Health of the startup and avoid Serious, OUT of CASH mistakes ... | Great Course ! Aspirant Entrepreneurs many | Time | make mistakes in the Innovative companies | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| yXMpEJw3EeW6bw4ogk2HGQ | I only can repeat my review of the past three coursers: excellent! Would do it ANY time again. Congratulations for this great course. | coursers: excellent! Would do it ANY | Time | again. Congratulations for this great course. | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| z-Ezh6UFEeWGbRLK1bnBqw | Too much question and it takes me too much time on it | and it takes me too much | Time | on it | Negative | 0.96 | 4.0 |
| z27B3GC0EeWHVg55pNeHQQ | Easily understandable even to those without prior knowledge of finance, but at the same time can also provide new information to those who have already studied finance. | of finance, but at the same | Time | can also provide new information to | Positive | 0.98 | 5.0 |
| z27B3GC0EeWHVg55pNeHQQ | Excellent course. I thought it was very much informative about the subject matter. I need to view the videos a few more times to gain more expertise over the subject matter. | view the videos a few more | Time | to gain more expertise over the | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course is very informative and gives us a pretty good understanding of memory and its working in short amount of time. More over this course also entertain using movies. you will learn in this more effectively and the perspective of us looking at the movies changes. Thank you Professor Seamon for this creative course work, that you designed. Also we can understand our memory and our personality. Highly recommended course. Thank you Coursera | its working in short amount of | Time | More over this course also entertain | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Good times! | Good | Time | | Positive | 0.86 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | well put together made me cry and laugh just a great time taking this course--thank you! | cry and laugh just a great | Time | taking this course--thank you! | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I thought this was a wonderful way to explain the science of memory. Many Doctors are giving a dementia test as part of a yearly exam. You draw a clock and must put in the time mentioned plus three words. Frankly, I was annoyed as I was a former teacher, had to drive, park, and use a ticket machine to visit the doctor. I was even more annoyed when I asked him if he could give me a stent test and he asked me how I knew about such things. People in the eighties are very sensitive about their mental abilities. Thank you for a nice experience! Joyce Spier | clock and must put in the | Time | mentioned plus three words. Frankly, I | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | So far, so good. I am absolutely loving the association of psychological concepts with famous movies. I am certain it's gonna help me remember these concepts for a long time! | remember these concepts for a long | Time | | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Definitely worth the time! | Definitely worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | A course which is very informative and accessible to anyone. The use of movies to illustrate the content is a very intelligent idea, as such illustrations help to deepen what is said and at the same time makes the lesson much more memorable. | is said and at the same | Time | makes the lesson much more memorable. | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Z3yHdBVBEeWvmQrN_lODCw | I enjoyed the lecture of Ms. Gerber. She has a very clear-cut way of explanation that truly draws me in. However, some of the concept in this lecture is taught without complete examples, so often time I find myself a little puzzled doing the assignment. Also, I would appreciate more chance to do more assignments to fully master the topic, though I understand the limit of a MOOC. Nevertheless, nice course! | taught without complete examples, so often | Time | I find myself a little puzzled | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| Z3yHdBVBEeWvmQrN_lODCw | Assignments at times a bit hazy and there is very little guidance. In general the types of assignments do not lend themselves too well to peer review. This is far off the standard set by courses 1 and 2. Lectures seem a bit generic and although Liz Gerber tries to make it hands on, the subject matter really doesnt seem anywhere as tangible as when Klemmer presents it. | Assignments at | Time | a bit hazy and there is | Positive | 0.75 | 2.0 |
| Z3yHdBVBEeWvmQrN_lODCw | Excellent!!! My time spent on this was worth it. | Excellent! ! ! My | Time | spent on this was worth it. | Negative | 0.87 | 5.0 |
| Z7-ViyT-EeW5pgpJEN0S6w | This course is a sort of sequel to "Introduction to Game Design", by providing a deeper learning about the usage of the Unity Engine for Game Development. In the course, the student will develop a game mostly from scratch, using the assets provided by the teachers. There is a stronger focus on coding this time, as well as, a demand for the development of new and original concepts at the end of it. | a stronger focus on coding this | Time | as well as, a demand for | Positive | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Z7-ViyT-EeW5pgpJEN0S6w | I am in the middle of the course and will continue till the end. The course does show an easy way how to develop a platformer with Unity3D. It covers a lot of subjects, although I have a feeling that I will need to read about Unity again later. Anyhow, it is too fast and the instructor does not really emphasize on important points. Sometimes he also fails to provide proper explanation of some important parameters. Also, the course is tutorial-oriented but it goes so fast I could not really follow the instructions. So, I ended up watching the classes through and do the tutorial later. But as I said, because the instructions are super-quick, I had to watch them again many times while trying to do the workshop. Maybe this is how it should be but I still feel that it could be a little slower and let be breath a little while trying to digest the content so that I can redo the work by my own after finishing the class. | had to watch them again many | Time | while trying to do the workshop. | Negative | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| z7qyITcjEeWnxw5wP_KHTw | The amount of information, the resources available and the time flexibility makes this course and the entire specialization a must for all those seeking to enhance their Public Relations skills. | information, the resources available and the | Time | flexibility makes this course and the | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| Zba0dJLREeSb9SIACzCJlg | I am very grateful for Stacia Spencer and Northwestern University for taking the time to put this course on Coursera. The videos, google hangouts, and supplementary materials have been incredibly helpful and opened my eyes to another side of violin pedagogy. | and Northwestern University for taking the | Time | to put this course on Coursera. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | I Really learn a lot of things! The instructor is very funny but at the same time extremely clear during his lesson. Thanks a lots | very funny but at the same | Time | extremely clear during his lesson. Thanks | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | it is a great start for people who want to learn how to code for the very first time | to code for the very first | Time | | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | Enjoyed the course. Gets difficult at times but, follow steps and ask questions and you should be able to do really well in this class. | Enjoyed the course. Gets difficult at | Time | but, follow steps and ask questions | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | Nice course, great instructor! This may be a little challenging for those who have no prior programming experience, but it's not impossible. Just keep going and you'll see you've learned a lot in a little period of time. If you have problems figuring out what's going on in lectures, go to Discussion Forums. There you can find helpful answers. | lot in a little period of | Time | If you have problems figuring out | Positive | 0.7 | 5.0 |
| ZgdEeNmtEeWIyg6KWmLgkQ | This class was ultimately great. I struggled a lot with it until week 9 or 10, when we really explained classes. Once I understood a thing I had been blindly using for a while, so much clicked into place for me. I did get frustrated when the homework asked for things that were beyond the lesson, and while I knew how to look up what I needed most of the time, I didn't know how to interpret what I was looking up, so it was useless. Again, after the classes lesson, it all made sense and I was fine and able to do things beyond what was spelled out for me. Even though XNA isn't supported anymore, I still learned a great deal in this class. People were also very helpful on the forums when anyone was stuck on something. | what I needed most of the | Time | I didn't know how to interpret | Negative | 0.88 | 5.0 |
| zHCX4hJgEeaX4g6xdats6w | The professor is well spoken and the class started out very well. But by the final section the hands on example were simply cut-paste with no explanation of what we were doing or how it worked. It's not the fault of the professor but this course and the Big Data specialization attempts to cover too much information. Graph Analytics should be its own 6 course specialization. But really, to understand graph analytics one should be spending a great deal of time with the subject. Perhaps online courses are not the way to understand such a complex subject. | be spending a great deal of | Time | with the subject. Perhaps online courses | Positive | 0.96 | 3.0 |
| zKZY59dlEeSQOCIAC0ELFw | Videos were a little slow. I would prefer more slides and factual information to memorize and then videos as an option to hear opinion and real time experience. | option to hear opinion and real | Time | experience. | Positive | 0.86 | 4.0 |
| zKZY59dlEeSQOCIAC0ELFw | Very nice overview. The time is short but the teacher adds a lot of his personal experience, and that makes the difference. Thank you for the opportunity! | Very nice overview. The | Time | is short but the teacher adds | Positive | 0.9 | 4.0 |
| zKZY59dlEeSQOCIAC0ELFw | Very good introduction presented in clear language and interesting fashion. David has great instructor skills that keeps you engaged with the videos all the time. Thanks | engaged with the videos all the | Time | Thanks | Positive | 0.73 | 5.0 |
| zKZY59dlEeSQOCIAC0ELFw | Helpful lecture on Writing a business plan and what it takes to be an Entrepreneur. Basically a very small overview of Business school. And then great advise and instruction on how to get your Business launched without any huge debilitating early mistakes or time wasted over planning. | any huge debilitating early mistakes or | Time | wasted over planning. | Negative | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Course have nice subject, but somehow cannot take my full attention all the time. Missing more practical examples. | take my full attention all the | Time | Missing more practical examples. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | An amazing start for my first online experience! This MOOC was an eye-opener for a field I had minimal knowledge about. It is a great testimony to the hard work of the organizers and executors of this course. The passion of the lecturer -Dr. Bart Van Heerikhuizen- trickles down to his audience through every single video of this MOOC. The adequately selected suggested readings were extremely coherent and captivating that even a week was barely enough for me to complete them. The books that I have on my to-read-list further to this course are so many, and I wish to get the time to do manage them. If you are hesitant about enrolling in this course, I strongly suggest you give it a shot. Cheers! | and I wish to get the | Time | to do manage them. If you | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Professor Bart is a really good teacher. Take this course and you will see. I have studied sociology at University of São Paulo, the biggest and the "best" university of Latin America (according to international ranking), since 2009. However, during all this time I never found a Professor like him. | since 2009. However, during all this | Time | I never found a Professor like | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I have started this course again and again. Although the lectures themselves are clear enough, the quizzes are sometime so confusing and don't reflect the way that topic was taught. The worst part is R lab. I understand nothing of it. It makes no sense. I should not be part of a basic statistics course. I have wasted my money on a specialization that I can't get because I will not, and simply cannot learn R. They should have made that clear this would involve programming. I am only now thinking of learning from the videos but have given up the hope of getting a specialization certificate. The instructor in the first two session was still engaging, but starting in the third lesson the instructor is so boring and his voice makes me drowsy. Plus his sentences are so long and confusing. He has a horrible way to explain something. They need to keep in mind this is BASIC statistics, so cut down on the jargon. He does introduce the terms in 3.01 but just after one video the words don't magically sit in my memory. I've given 3 stars because although I have to work double hard just to make sense of what the instructor says by reading a book on basic statistics, at least the videos provide a structure, good examples and after watching them a few times things become clear. | and after watching them a few | Time | things become clear. | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | on the quizzes was frustrating at | Time | | Positive | 0.64 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | In my opinion this course is a good way to learn basic statistics. I do think the R part and the statistics part could be more integrated in order to learn R better and to use it more efficiently. For me the studytime was double the time that was stated even though I was already familiar with some of the concepts and calculations. I feel like some weeks the subjects should have gotten a little more explanation with video's or other supportive material, maybe some assigments to make in order to check wether you know and understand the material. Maybe you could compare content and way of teaching to the Duke University statistics course, this is not a better course per se but does do some things differently whilst both teaching stats and R. | me the studytime was double the | Time | that was stated even though I | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I've always had a rough time with mathematics, but the way this course is structured makes it easy for me to go at my own pace, re-watch videos that were confusing the first time through and work through problems until I really felt like I understand how the formulas work. The consistent use of exercises in R were extremely useful as well. I'd highly recommend this course and learning system for people like me, who never thought they'd be able to grasp mathematics. | I've always had a rough | Time | with mathematics, but the way this | Positive | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I've always had a rough time with mathematics, but the way this course is structured makes it easy for me to go at my own pace, re-watch videos that were confusing the first time through and work through problems until I really felt like I understand how the formulas work. The consistent use of exercises in R were extremely useful as well. I'd highly recommend this course and learning system for people like me, who never thought they'd be able to grasp mathematics. | videos that were confusing the first | Time | through and work through problems until | Positive | 0.89 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Both of the lecturers as well as the staff are excellent in making the learning simple, exciting and interesting. I have learned so much about statistics in so short a time with effectiveness and efficiency. Thanks for the excellent work. And all of you have made University of Amsterdam proud and stand tall. | about statistics in so short a | Time | with effectiveness and efficiency. Thanks for | Positive | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Absolutely great start for statistics with R. Not too heavy in time, not too light. Amazingly curated course. | with R. Not too heavy in | Time | not too light. Amazingly curated course. | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I love the main lecture of the statistics. The Subject is fun. After couple lecture, my mind was very clear. But most of the time I'm working on the statistics software name R. I think it would be better if require R knowledge. If not, student like me will need more than weeks to get use to R. I don't mean learn another software is bad idea. I will always like to learn something new. That's why I go MOOC. What I mean is R and Basic Statistics should be separated. First R, than Basic Statistic. Or first Basic Statistic than R. I really enjoy the class. but the extra is a bit heavy for me. | very clear. But most of the | Time | I'm working on the statistics software | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | ---------- way too much time is devoted to introducing definitions and way too little time is given for student practicing and review . the presenter's accent is constantly impeding instant recognition of what he's saying. the subtitles sometimes don't accurately represent what he's saying. sometimes there are misspellings - which makes it even harder to know what he's saying. this student was inundated with formulas that needed to be practiced - and i didn't even have time to write them down ! | ---------- way too much | Time | is devoted to introducing definitions and | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | ---------- way too much time is devoted to introducing definitions and way too little time is given for student practicing and review . the presenter's accent is constantly impeding instant recognition of what he's saying. the subtitles sometimes don't accurately represent what he's saying. sometimes there are misspellings - which makes it even harder to know what he's saying. this student was inundated with formulas that needed to be practiced - and i didn't even have time to write them down ! | introducing definitions and way too little | Time | is given for student practicing and | Negative | 0.92 | 2.0 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | ---------- way too much time is devoted to introducing definitions and way too little time is given for student practicing and review . the presenter's accent is constantly impeding instant recognition of what he's saying. the subtitles sometimes don't accurately represent what he's saying. sometimes there are misspellings - which makes it even harder to know what he's saying. this student was inundated with formulas that needed to be practiced - and i didn't even have time to write them down ! | - and i didn't even have | Time | to write them down ! | Negative | 0.99 | 2.0 |
| zN_XyjlAEeWCYBKNeFwojw | A comprehensive overview of web programming, good for a noob, or as a review whose previous web programming experience may have been limited to the national supercomputing consortium's free (now archived) HTML manual. The content of this specialization will get you up to speed quickly. As with all Coursera courses, it is up to you to unfold the concentrated content on your own time. This lecturer makes it easy to do so. I highly recommend this course! | the concentrated content on your own | Time | This lecturer makes it easy to | Positive | 0.91 | 5.0 |
| zSmzLR5LEeS6wiIACzGPEQ | We are just beginning to tap into the Sharing Economy. This course gave me lots of valuable updates and new knowledge to better understand the change is business that is transforming the way we live and prosper at the same time as we together take care of the world around us. | live and prosper at the same | Time | as we together take care of | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Loving this course! Very engaging subject matter and instructor has discussed topics in such a way as to make you want to know more and to continue with the lessons even though it's way past bedtime! I have learned quite a bit so far and am developing further interest in that time period, especially how the Ancient Greeks have shaped societal constructs and belief systems and how they have affected us throughout the ages to modern life as we know it. | am developing further interest in that | Time | period, especially how the Ancient Greeks | Positive | 0.85 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Professor Andy lectures really made me enjoy my time spent learned and studying about the Ancient Greeks, now having skimmed the top of some history of the Ancient Greeks I look to discover more by myself and as suggested in this course. "Think like the Greeks." Good day. | lectures really made me enjoy my | Time | spent learned and studying about the | Negative | 0.83 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | I had forgotten how much reading there is! I didn't have a lot of time, but I enjoyed the lectures a lot and it revisited my interest in history and ancient civilizations. I think I learned more from this than the Ancient Civ class I took many years ago in college! Most enjoyable! | I didn't have a lot of | Time | but I enjoyed the lectures a | Negative | 0.62 | 4.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. The lectures were easy to follow and the additional reading material fit to the lectures. I would subscribe to a follow-up course any time! | subscribe to a follow-up course any | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Very interesting class. The readings were helpful in understanding a deep appreciation for the subjects covered. Still dislike the multiple guess questions at the end of each section, think essays would show mastery of the bigger picture, but understand the constrains of time on the professor. Still, I would recommend this class as a basic introduction to Ancie | picture, but understand the constrains of | Time | on the professor. Still, I would | Negative | 0.77 | 5.0 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Excellent course! Very knowledgeable professor, yet easy and pleasant to follow. The programme is well structured and the content approached with some depth (considering the introductory nature of the course). I would have loved to see, though, a focus more on philosophy (pre- and post- socratic), visual arts and the Hellenistic period, as it is most of the times neglected, even in today's historical accounts. Hope to see more courses on Classical Studies soon at Coursera. | as it is most of the | Time | neglected, even in today's historical accounts. | Positive | 0.99 | 4.0 |
| zwNXQiWXEeWCGRL6mLoB5w | I always loved designing and had time only to do certification and this was a great opportunity and learnt a lot . | I always loved designing and had | Time | only to do certification and this | Positive | 0.94 | 5.0 |
| zyGo9ph2EeSyKiIAC0EFDA | Edward Hess is a great tutor, enthusiastic and very knowledgeable. Time flies with Ed! It's always engaging watching and learning from him. I can't wait to apply the principles, skills and techniques to my own company and follow suit - Grow to Greatness. Thanks for a great course! | great tutor, enthusiastic and very knowledgeable. | Time | flies with Ed! It's always engaging | Positive | 0.92 | 5.0 |
| _AAoM1DLEeW02w4zzsdA1Q | Great course! just it misses some of the basics. Fortunately I already knew how to read a pentagram and note lengths so it was OK for me, but the "True" beginners had a little bit of an issue with time lengths at first | little bit of an issue with | Time | lengths at first | Positive | 0.78 | 4.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Even with a few bumps in the coursework, I felt the information was interesting, enlightening and I appreciated the time I put into the class - it was not wasted. I will certainly be a better classroom teacher for having taken the class, and I look forward to the next "Unwritten" class as well. | interesting, enlightening and I appreciated the | Time | I put into the class - | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is a great class and the lectures are very interesting. I hope to have time to finish these in the near future. | very interesting. I hope to have | Time | to finish these in the near | Positive | 0.99 | 5.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course was a great introduction to the United States Constitution. The material was given sufficient lecture time to allow you to grasp the information and it was not rushed through. | The material was given sufficient lecture | Time | to allow you to grasp the | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I was very disaappointed by this course, in fact a bit more so than by the "Unwritten" course that has run concurrently with this one. I was **very** put off by the professor's simply opening his book and trying to remember what he'd said there and then, in front of his audience, reduce it down to a videoed talk. He needed to put some effort and thought into understanding his topic from the point of view of an audience that is inevitably very, very different from the one he had in mind (if any, in particular) as he was writing the book. If he didn't have time for proper preparation, he should have found another medium for flogging his publications. By and large, everyone who is from the US (I'm not) and who teaches about the US constitution emphasizes its uniqueness. Indeed, they have a point: it was the first (and, admirably, the shortest) modern written constitution. However, uniqueness isn't unique among nations; all nations are somehow unique. Undertanding a nation (including thir constitution) has to involve looking at both hum-drum normality as well as uniqueness. I felt that the course would have been more substantial if it had been built on the obvious fact that the US revolutionaries were "Englishmen fighting for an Englishman's rights." And, indeed, what they created had both the worst and the best traits that England's historical jurisprudence offered. Social stare decisis has been a major stumbling-block not only for common-law countries but as well for countries that follow other sorts of jurisprudence. The course was embarrassingly bad. | the book. If he didn't have | Time | for proper preparation, he should have | Negative | 0.95 | 2.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Prof. Amar.approach of historical and chronological approach was an interesting study in contrast to others at unique to everything else out there. It was an excellent time to be reading with the resignation Speaker of the House, during the Pope's visit. The colonial soldiers marching in front of the white house welcoming the Pope, a reminder of the established values by the founding establishment A great time to be a descendant from the original Reformed Church of America and a stranger to people like the Pope. | out there. It was an excellent | Time | to be reading with the resignation | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Prof. Amar.approach of historical and chronological approach was an interesting study in contrast to others at unique to everything else out there. It was an excellent time to be reading with the resignation Speaker of the House, during the Pope's visit. The colonial soldiers marching in front of the white house welcoming the Pope, a reminder of the established values by the founding establishment A great time to be a descendant from the original Reformed Church of America and a stranger to people like the Pope. | by the founding establishment A great | Time | to be a descendant from the | Positive | 0.96 | 5.0 |
| _aXKkBnJEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Professor is difficult to follow, often repeating himself and adds fluff that can often be a waste of time | can often be a waste of | Time | | Negative | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| _ehbrDx9EeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | Brilliant professor, with an intellectually rigorous, subtle, in-depth and wide ranging approach to unfolding a complex and at times controversial subject. I appreciate the numerous references to history, philosophy and economics, which balance the discussions of the place of religion in state institutions and policy. The legal framework was a treasure trove. Many thanks to Professor Afsah. I look forward to future courses you offer. | to unfolding a complex and at | Time | controversial subject. I appreciate the numerous | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| _ehbrDx9EeWFSA6UPWxRyQ | Simply superb. Excellent instructor and fascinating topic. Many thanks for the professor and his staff for all the time and effort. | and his staff for all the | Time | and effort. | Positive | 0.68 | 5.0 |
| _j_95QpWEeWoRw4pD4cXmw | Doing it for the second time...now to get the certificate. Just 3 words. Well Done Lund!!! | Doing it for the second | Time | . . now to get the | Neutral | 0.50 | 5.0 |
| _j_95QpWEeWoRw4pD4cXmw | The course s outstanding; well designed , interesting and well presented but it should be with statement of accomplishments. Because in third world countries, the concept of online open courses will take time to gain acceptance. So in order to prove the "Worth" of these course, they demand documentary proof. 49$ is big amount ( 1$ =104 PKR) in 3rd world countries, so its not possible to pay for one course. | of online open courses will take | Time | to gain acceptance. So in order | Positive | 0.78 | 5.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | This course seems patched together. The volume isn't consistent, even within videos. Some videos / slides are great and full of information, while others are just long periods of talking with one word or phrase on the screen and none of the information put in written form. Some of the questions occur in multiple practice quizzes. Also, there are misspellings in the quizzes. Finally, one quiz marked a question wrong and then, in the comments, noted the answer was right. Further, some of the videos seem to stretch out information to fill time. | to stretch out information to fill | Time | | Negative | 0.75 | 2.0 |
| _Mms-nE8EeWKsgrp3VnvAw | The subject is interesting and the instructors both seemed very competent. Still I wish the course had been better prepared as there were lots of sounds defects: you had to adjust the volume during each video which is tiresome. In the same idea, the questions during the course would pop up in mid-sentence, sometimes with too much anticipation with the subject at hand. Last, the questions in the assignments were sometimes not so much to check your understanding but your memory about a small detail like a % in a study that is already obsolete by the time we learn it... All in all a great course, with great instructors but still room for improvement as a mooc. | that is already obsolete by the | Time | we learn it. . . All | Neutral | 0.50 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Really pushes a student to study each class really well. It takes a lot of time but we learn a lot. | well. It takes a lot of | Time | but we learn a lot. | Positive | 0.82 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Useful for the beginners with no economic background. English is a great advantage, since one has to check the terms in one's own language, developing language skills. The only drawback for me is that by the time I finished some lessons (which could take up to five days), I had forgotten a lot of material (especially the formulas), so I had to go back and revise. | for me is that by the | Time | I finished some lessons (which could | Negative | 0.66 | 5.0 |
| _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. | encountering this great professor a second | Time | (Finance fof Non Finance. . . | Positive | 0.97 | 5.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | It presents a lot of different aspect of macro economics in a really short time which is good. But because of that, it doesn't give a good understandings of each problem. Nice introduction, but I will start another class on the subject which I would have liked to avoid. | macro economics in a really short | Time | which is good. But because of | Negative | 0.62 | 3.0 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | The course is a little bigger than others available by other universities. But it is straight to the point, so you don't waste time listening to soft things that aren't directly connected to the core of the subject. | the point, so you don't waste | Time | listening to soft things that aren't | Negative | 1.0 | 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! | quizzes that can be retaken several | Time | makes it very easy in my | Positive | 0.99 | 3.0 |
| __JK5M3TEeSa0iIAC9RQCQ | Comprehensive. But some terms are aligned to the US and European economy. But I still had a good time learning about the basics. | But I still had a good | Time | learning about the basics. | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| __JK5M3TEeSa0iIAC9RQCQ | The course is informative while at the same time, quite innovative. The first four weeks provide well-designed and effective video clips introducing basic saving, investment, insurance ... knowledge. The last week talks about Entrepreneurship and MBA, which gives me a new insight towards how business works. Really useful for my career. Thank you very much :) | is informative while at the same | Time | quite innovative. The first four weeks | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I join this course without no java programming experience. This course is really helpful and also challenging. It is worth the time. | also challenging. It is worth the | Time | | Positive | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Might seem a bit overwhelming to beginners, but at the same time, a useful course to practice writing code on real-life data sets, for experienced learners. The library used here is useful, but not reusable in general. Overall, a nice experience. :) | to beginners, but at the same | Time | a useful course to practice writing | Positive | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very practical and useful knowledge! Thanks for your time and effort. | and useful knowledge! Thanks for your | Time | and effort. | Negative | 0.92 | 4.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | If you are a real beginner like me (having zero or little programming knowledge) and your time is limited, I think this course (or the specialisation) is not suitable for you. The assignments and quizzes are very time consuming. One week I spent literally 30+ hours writing and debugging codes for just one quiz. | or little programming knowledge) and your | Time | is limited, I think this course | Negative | 0.96 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | If you are a real beginner like me (having zero or little programming knowledge) and your time is limited, I think this course (or the specialisation) is not suitable for you. The assignments and quizzes are very time consuming. One week I spent literally 30+ hours writing and debugging codes for just one quiz. | The assignments and quizzes are very | Time | consuming. One week I spent literally | Neutral | 0.50 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It is really not for beginners. The first week was ok , but we didn't spend much time coding. Then it was really difficult to follow. | , but we didn't spend much | Time | coding. Then it was really difficult | Negative | 0.88 | 2.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Very nice introduction to Java. Of course using BlueJ and EduDuke libraries (that is libraries crafted specifically for the course that are nor used in real life) gives this feeling of not coding for real. But that's good. Real coding comes in the later courses of this specialization so this approach seems to be very good for introducing people to Java without wasting to much time to details being unimportant on the early stages of learning. | to Java without wasting to much | Time | to details being unimportant on the | Negative | 0.95 | 5.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good course and quite unique approach... could have been more interesting and fun! Video presentation is too geeky at times. | Video presentation is too geeky at | Time | | Neutral | 0.50 | 4.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The homework is too time consuming. | The homework is too | Time | consuming. | Negative | 0.65 | 4.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Does very little to actually help you learn JAVA. Explains nothing about why the language works as it does.. Also it insists on you using their libraries and programming environments. You spend perhaps 20% of your time actually practicing coding, and the rest is wasted in libraries you will never use again. Such a waste | You spend perhaps 20% of your | Time | actually practicing coding, and the rest | Negative | 0.94 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is a good Java Tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWX97e1E9g&list=PLE7E8B7F4856C9B19 I followed two videos and I'm learning in my way. I left the course because the ammount of time required was too high. For example, for one part of an exercise I spent a total of 12 hours distributed in 3 days. For the other part of the exercise I spent 1 hour. Also, in the part one, the last exercise was tremendouly difficult for begginers and for someone (my case) that know one language. You are making people hate Java. This is not for begginers. I have to say that the part of codepen and HTML was great. Fortunatelly, I didn't pay. But I think that paying for this course is a waste of money. I had a good experience in other Coursera programming course: "An Introduction to Interactive Programming in Python" of Rice Unviersity. The examples were awesome and the tests were reasonable, quite the opposite to this course. Also, Eclipse is so much better than BlueJ in many ways, also into learning... And there's more things that must be improved, but no time and no money. I'm very dissapointed to this course and Duke Univeristy. | the course because the ammount of | Time | required was too high. For example, | Negative | 0.91 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is a good Java Tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWX97e1E9g&list=PLE7E8B7F4856C9B19 I followed two videos and I'm learning in my way. I left the course because the ammount of time required was too high. For example, for one part of an exercise I spent a total of 12 hours distributed in 3 days. For the other part of the exercise I spent 1 hour. Also, in the part one, the last exercise was tremendouly difficult for begginers and for someone (my case) that know one language. You are making people hate Java. This is not for begginers. I have to say that the part of codepen and HTML was great. Fortunatelly, I didn't pay. But I think that paying for this course is a waste of money. I had a good experience in other Coursera programming course: "An Introduction to Interactive Programming in Python" of Rice Unviersity. The examples were awesome and the tests were reasonable, quite the opposite to this course. Also, Eclipse is so much better than BlueJ in many ways, also into learning... And there's more things that must be improved, but no time and no money. I'm very dissapointed to this course and Duke Univeristy. | that must be improved, but no | Time | and no money. I'm very dissapointed | Negative | 0.98 | 1.0 |
| __y3wBnnEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good course, it seemed too easy at times since they provided alot of guides to solving the programming problems but I might be biased since I have some programming background. Overall I would recommend for beginners interested in learning java. | course, it seemed too easy at | Time | since they provided alot of guides | Positive | 0.98 | 4.0 |