| Doc_id | Review | Left | Term | Right | Sentiment | Polarity | Rating | Contradiction-Based_MOY | Contradiction-Based_Ci |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | The other modules that I have done in this specialisation have been great. The lecturers are insightful and the courses have been at the right pace. This particular module was flat, to say the least. I paid €43 to learn a small amount of markdown syntax, and the quizzes and the weeks didn't even match up! | amount of markdown syntax, and the | Quizz | and the weeks didn't even match | Negative | -0.87 | -1.0 | 1.0 | 1.08 |
| -4ffSHNYEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Overall a good course for self-study. The assignments in particular are excellent for data cleaning, analysis and interpretation. The quizzes are very basic though and appear to be there only to check if the student has gone through the lectures. The knowledge needed to answer the quizzes and achieve the desired results in the assignments are vastly different and should be addressed. The case studies at the end are insightful and more use could be made of them in a more advanced course. There is a lot of repetition of concepts throughout the course and this can become distracting. THe format for the lecture videos varies throughout and this inconsistency (along with extreme audio volume changes) also becomes distracting. Other than that, excellent for driving the need for reproducible research (RR) home, presenting and explaining some tools available to achieve RR and ways of publishing results/reports from these studies. | data cleaning, analysis and interpretation. The | Quizz | are very basic though and appear | Positive | 0.87 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.08 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | very well presented and enjoyable to listen to, the summary's helped a lot and the quizzes were a good way to remember what was learnt in the lessons. Thank you | summary's helped a lot and the | Quizz | were a good way to remember | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.76 | 1.23 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Overall, I enjoyed this course, but it gave just a bit too much information on cognitive studies in other species, and it left me still wanting to learn more about dogs. The last 2 weeks were great! The professor was engaging and his work was very interesting, but he said ummm and ahhh so many times that it was a little distracting. The quizzes were good, but some of the questions were worded very oddly so I just couldn't get them right without several attempts. I didn't feel like he covered dog emotion at all. I thought there would be some discussion of facial expressions, the meaning of different tail wags, and the extent of dog emotion (for example, how they grieve and how long they grieve after a loss). | it was a little distracting. The | Quizz | were good, but some of the | Negative | -0.86 | 0.0 | 0.76 | 1.23 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting and thought provoking course, I have learned a lot. However some quizzes we not moderetated and some answeres seems to have mistakes. | have learned a lot. However some | Quizz | we not moderetated and some answeres | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.76 | 1.23 |
| -Eu38u08EeSKeyIACwQXPg | Very interesting course. The quizzes were challenging, which was good, and I liked that there was a final exam, too. The lecturer was maybe a bit too "wordy" and could have cut to the point faster without repetition but he was being enthusiastic about his topic, so that is forgiven. Overall, a good course! | Very interesting course. The | Quizz | were challenging, which was good, and | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 0.76 | 1.23 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Excellent course! Subjects are explained very well! Excellent quizzes that allow understanding of lectures better and excellent (challenging ) programming assignments. | Subjects are explained very well! Excellent | Quizz | that allow understanding of lectures better | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.97 | 1.24 |
| -N44X0IJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 0.97 | 1.24 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | You will have to make a Scratch account (free) for this course. Areti is a very clear instructor that explained concepts very well for complete beginners into programming, like myself and I found the course insightful. 1) Presentation - I couldn't help but wonder whether they had a lower target age (teenagers or younger) in mind, which was entertaining at some points but also distracting at other times. // Also, I only realized halfway through the course that it is in fact possible to see what Areti is doing on the Scratch program once the quality of the video is adjusted. 2) Projects/Time Commitment - Going through the lectures and quizzes are not time consuming at all, but the projects (especially the final project) takes a lot of time. It took longer than expected because I felt like much of the practical instructions on how to use Scratch for specific purposes were not provided during the course, leaving me to work by myself. 3) Discussion Forum - When I took the course, the discussion forum was close to being dead (especially compared to some of the other courses that I was taking simultaneously on Coursera). Gerry (mentor) did an amazing job responding to my inquiry, but I noticed that although there were a lot of students talking at the beginning, introducing themselves, there weren't that many discussions concerning the final assignment, making me feel like I was working alone. It would be great if there was more time to work on the final project, and perhaps a way in which students can collaborate and help out others when faced with a bug (ie preliminary project submission and feedback session). I recommend taking this course, but realistically, you won't be program proficient after 5 weeks. You will, however, learn some basic programming theory, understand how programming works, and learn how to make a fun interactive game on Scratch! | - Going through the lectures and | Quizz | are not time consuming at all, | Negative | -0.81 | 0.5 | 0.93 | 1.12 |
| -qKIDPnAEeS1QCIACy-KcQ | This was a great class for me. I had fun learning about programming concepts and Scratch. There are weekly quizzes and two projects to work on. Both the quizzes and the projects will definitely help you learn more about software design principles. You will have fun while learning and working on your coding skills. I took toward taking more courses on Scratch if they are available. | projects to work on. Both the | Quizz | and the projects will definitely help | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.12 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Simple and fast. Try to put more difficulty on the quizzes. | to put more difficulty on the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.63 | 0.0 | 0.65 | 0.74 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | Please include exercises for computing the ratios and the valuation methods. In-video questions would have helped more. The quiz does not actually test the understanding of the topic in-depth. There can be some external readings suggested - resources that help us get more understanding on the subjects discussed. | questions would have helped more. The | Quizz | does not actually test the understanding | Negative | -0.67 | -0.5 | 0.65 | 0.74 |
| 0aY3BdGZEeSX5iIAC4tS5g | This course was quick and simple. I enjoyed the definitions and monetary examples. I would have more quizzes and harder questions. | monetary examples. I would have more | Quizz | and harder questions. | Negative | -0.76 | 0.0 | 0.65 | 0.74 |
| 0EqoQy7_EeWPngoW78wA_Q | I wish they could let us take the quizzes without having to pay to verify that we have understood the lectures. However, the topic of the course and the lectures are clear and on point. Love the lessons so far! | they could let us take the | Quizz | without having to pay to verify | Negative | -0.91 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 0.83 |
| 0EqoQy7_EeWPngoW78wA_Q | Interesting overview of group psychology - but in essence just a bunch of definitions and statistics. I would have liked more focus on how the group dynamics works and how to influence these - and break the circle of unpopularity, the tools to overcome the aggressive stamp etc. Also, I found the quizzes often had unclear and ambiguous wording. Generally happy to have taken the course - but did not quite meet the description or my expectations. Off to the next :-) | stamp etc. Also, I found the | Quizz | often had unclear and ambiguous wording. | Positive | 0.74 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 0.83 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Good Job I really enjoyed having this course and learn new tips but if you can open the quiz parts so participants are able to solve them without having to purchase the Course Certificate that will be better. Thanks for your effort. | but if you can open the | Quizz | parts so participants are able to | Positive | 0.62 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Too basic! Can't even do the quiz without payment! | Too basic! Can't even do the | Quizz | without payment! | Negative | -0.97 | -0.5 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | great content. learnt about strategic reserve times, and other practical tips. if only I could see my quiz results for free | if only I could see my | Quizz | results for free | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | I liked the course, however I'd like to give some feedback that might be useful to you: I was surprised a bit how short the course is. When I read this "4-8 hours of videos, readings, and quizzes" I thought that there will be 4-8 hours of videos _besides_ readings and quizzes. So this one is a bit misleading. Despite of this I liked the course. It gave me a lot of tricks and tips. However I don't understand the final 96.4% either. Maybe I missed something because after the last assignment the result has gone away in less then 1 second. As far as I know all my assignments were 100%. The design of the videos is a bit "spartan" :) I finished a couple of other Coursera courses (HCI, Gamification etc.) where the videos were much more delightful. This white background, black text is very disappointing. Anyway: Thanks! | hours of videos _besides_ readings and | Quizz | So this one is a bit | Positive | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Quizzes could have been harder. The presentations were great. Took back a lot from this short course. | | Quizz | could have been harder. The presentations | Negative | -0.92 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 1ndQqNPxEeSloiIAC3kKUw | Maybe a little too short. Quite easy on the quizzes too. The information is very good though. Many of these techniques I am already doing, so this was more of an affirmation of being on the right track for me than much of anything else. | too short. Quite easy on the | Quizz | too. The information is very good | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.04 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | A nice blend of statistics, applied labs using R, and a final exploratory data analysis project that the course prepares you for very well. The instructor is informative, easy to understand, and brings enjoyment to the video lectures. The open textbook is well aligned and easy to read. The quizzes and labs are challenging. The mentors are responsive and helpful. | aligned and easy to read. The | Quizz | and labs are challenging. The mentors | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | occasions, concepts are used in the | Quizz | questions (either directly in the questions | Positive | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Very mixed feelings about this course. Generally speaking, the course lectures are informative and well organized. Mentors are reallly of great help, they are doing a great job, honestly: they are very active, they give good insights, they know the subject matter. But in the course lectures, there are occasions where concepts are used which were not formally introduced before their actual use. One example: in the lectures on probability, the first "slide" in the lecture talks about random processes, outcomes of random process,... On the next slide, the notion of probability of an event is introduced, but the very notion of "event" was never introduced. It is introduced in the accompanying book, but if it is the case that the book chapters should be read PRIOR to watching the course videos, that fact should be made clear. Further in the course on probability, some words are used "interchangeably" without the context making it clear why they can be used interchangeably. For instance, on some occasions, the concept of independent events is used, but then, later on, the discussion talks of independent processes. Which is which??? Is there a difference? If so, what is it? When do I need to use independent events as opposed to independent processes? The graded assignments are of varying quality. The most disturbing thing about them is that, on some occasions, concepts are used in the quiz questions (either directly in the questions and answer choices, or indirectly in the "correction" for the quiz after you have submitted it) that were never touched upon in the course. I have had two occasions of concepts not introduced in the course but used in the graded assignments. The first occurrence of a gap between course content and quiz questions was on a quiz question about inference. I failed the question, and understood why I failed based on the course content litterally minutes after failing the question (and one mentor actually rightly corrected me). But the question "correction" (the explanation text you receive after submitting, as justification for what the correct answer is) referred to the concept of "two-sided hypothesis test". Where did THAT come from?? I checked and rechecked the course videos, no mention at all of it. I checked the accompanying book, and the first mention of two-sided hypothesis test is way way way further in the book, in a chapter that is entirely focusing on inference. The second occurrence was in week 4. The course lectures cover two distributions: normal and binomial. The recommended reading in the book also focus on these two distributions (the recommended reading actually skips the section on geometric distribution, if I remember well). But in one of the quiz question, there was one of the possible answers referring to the geometric distribution. If it is the case that we are supposed to know and understand about geometric distributions, then the course content should cover the subject. Or at the very least, the course lecture should mention clearly that learners are advised to read about it in the accompanying book. The guidelines for the project assignment (week 5) are not all that clear as to what is expected from the learners. Sure, there are instructions on where to find the info, what structure should be followed,... There is also a very nice "example" project (designed by one of the mentors), which provides a lot of useful info (how to filter missing values from variables,...). But there is no real hint as to the depth of analysis we are expected to complete. This is definitely a source of confusion, not only for me, but also for a few other learners, from what I gathered in the discussion forums. The result is that the projects you get to review are of very disparate levels. Some end up in calculating one figure per research question, without any attempt at deriving trends or patterns, others do not include any plots at all,... The thing is that the peer review criteria do not really provide a good basis to ensure that learners did indeed assimilate the course contents. Most of the questions in the peer review assignment have a lot more to do with following a canvas and not so much with the course substance itself. For instance, some of the peer review criteria have to do with the narratives for computed statistics and plots. The criteria are: "Is each plot/R outout followed by a narrative", "Does the narrative correctly interpret the plots, or statistics", "Does the narrative address the research question". But when the research question is a question of the type "What it the IQR for income per state", for instance, the narrative can be very short: "IQR per state shows that the state with higher variability of income is...". So, the narrative meets the 3 evaluation criteria: there is a narrative, it does address the research question, and it does correctly interpret the statistics. But it is not particularly useful. I do understand that Internet-based peer review is challenging, and that you have to settle for "neutral" criteria that are easy to assess by learners. But the peer review grading "grid" as it currently stands is not "that" helpful in assessing whether the course contents has been assimilated. To conclude, when I took the course, my initial plan was to follow the entire specialization. But after having completed the first course of the specialization, I have radically changed my mind, and will look for alternatives "elsewhere" to get the knowledge/skillset that I am after. | and quiz questions was on a | Quizz | question about inference. I failed the | Negative | -0.78 | 0.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Excellent course. Very engaging. The amount of effort the team has put in is very evident. The quizzes in the lecture make you pause, think and reinforce the concepts. I am currently doing John Hopkins data specialization as well, but this is way better. Thank you! | put in is very evident. The | Quizz | in the lecture make you pause, | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | Professor Cetinkaya-Rundel's explanations are clear and she gives many examples, the quizzes are fair and I think it is an excellent idea to have a lab in R to get students familiar with that tool. I recommend that students read the book chapters and do the practice problems there, it's very helpful. My one criticism is that the amount of R taught in the course is not really enough to do a good job on the capstone project, because the data in the given database is formatted very differently. I think maybe the course staff could reformat the database to make it more user-friendly for beginning R users, but in the meantime you may want to study a little R on the side at, say, DataCamp. | and she gives many examples, the | Quizz | are fair and I think it | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | and has included some very effective | Quizz | and lab exercises. I first encountered | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | are way easier than the real | Quizz | and do not really prepare you | Negative | -0.79 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 2dHcFsRdEeW2JxKnR3RyOw | This is a brilliant course that makes statistics and probability as approachable, engaging and clear as humanely possible. Prof. Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel explains every subject very clearly, and has included some very effective quizzes and lab exercises. I first encountered R markdown files in this course and have used them constantly ever since. My only tiny point of criticism is that the non-graded exercise quizzes are way easier than the real quizzes, and do not really prepare you at all to the more complex questions in the actual quizzes. It's a petty and unimportant kind of criticism in an otherwise wonderful course. If everyone taught stats like Prof. Cetinkaya-Rundel, this important subject would have been a whole lot better understood and utilized globally. | more complex questions in the actual | Quizz | It's a petty and unimportant kind | Positive | 0.79 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.15 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course covers many aspects of classification, with each section building on the one before. The lectures cover the theory, with a little bit of practical information, fairly well. The instructor tries to make the lectures interesting, and they are. The quizzes seem designed both to reinforce what the lectures taught and to expand on them. The quizzes, particularly those based on programming, could use proofreading by someone newer to the subject. | lectures interesting, and they are. The | Quizz | seem designed both to reinforce what | Positive | 0.66 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The course covers many aspects of classification, with each section building on the one before. The lectures cover the theory, with a little bit of practical information, fairly well. The instructor tries to make the lectures interesting, and they are. The quizzes seem designed both to reinforce what the lectures taught and to expand on them. The quizzes, particularly those based on programming, could use proofreading by someone newer to the subject. | and to expand on them. The | Quizz | particularly those based on programming, could | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The quizzes can be a bit more challenging | The | Quizz | can be a bit more challenging | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| 3c1bSkIJEeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | The videos are fine. But, It's SIMPLY TERRIBLE to force people to pay to be able to do the quizzes. There was no such a thing in the first two courses (by the way, I gave high rates for both). It is OK to pay for the verified certificate, however, disabling the functions in the course is a wrong way to earn money, because people who want to learn the course might not necessarily want the certificate, and this is unfair to them because it limits the resources available. This whole Specialization thing starts to make me feel like you guys are in urgent need of money, rather benefiting the community. Remember there are tons of free resources on the internet, and this only undermines your strengths. You will lose tons of potential fans. Stop being seemingly arrogant. | to be able to do the | Quizz | There was no such a thing | Negative | -0.9 | -1.0 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I learned Korean nearly 20 years ago and decided to work through this course as a refresher. The course is fairly well done. The pace is a little aggressive, which is fine if you take your time to learn each lesson before moving on. Language courses are not the kind where you can just listen and then take the quiz. Slow down. Practice. By week four the speakers in the audio files were speaking on a level where I was having difficulty distinguishing some of the words. In particular, the differences between the 20th and 21st of the month can be somewhat challenging for a beginning speaker of Korean. On the quizzes, I slowed down and repeated some of the audio. Even so, I missed a few questions. I think the course should take more care in producing the audio files and planning the questions. Some of those my be nearly impossible for beginners to get correct. | just listen and then take the | Quizz | Slow down. Practice. By week four | Negative | -0.76 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.87 |
| 3G1aij8iEeWKOBLv1z6n9w | I have studied Korean for about 10 months and still found some of the information useful. The numbers and dates always confuse me till this day. Quizzes were on average too easy, just listening or multiple choice. The answers were easy to find without much thought. | always confuse me till this day. | Quizz | were on average too easy, just | Positive | 0.79 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.87 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | The new platform is very versatile and easy to navigate. The page layout is much more clear. It is easy to navigate from course material to discussion boards. I like the Quiz format, including expanding the number of choices for the multiple choice selections, but the grading was confusing. For Quiz 3, some questions came back with multiple "Well Done" comments, even when I had not selected the answer for which I was being praised. I also was told I made errors on the same question.... and this was after I answered the question (Question 2, on R generic functions) the exact same as I had answered it when I took the course earlier this year. I was not a fan of not having to take a picture to submit work, so I am pleased that is no longer a requirement. I hope the typing pattern match is sufficient to affirm identity. I have one comment on content specific to this class. Week 3 content lacks relevancy to the project and data products in general. I agree that knowledge of R packages, classes, and methods is an important part of understanding R. I am not sure where that fits in the Data Science curriculum as a whole, though. Maybe expanding the curriculum to include a second, more advanced R class, with a project to write our own methods, build an R package, or do something with yhat. That would assign relevant work to reinforce the lectures. I would be happy to do further beta testing. DCP | to discussion boards. I like the | Quizz | format, including expanding the number of | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.75 | 1.05 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | The new platform is very versatile and easy to navigate. The page layout is much more clear. It is easy to navigate from course material to discussion boards. I like the Quiz format, including expanding the number of choices for the multiple choice selections, but the grading was confusing. For Quiz 3, some questions came back with multiple "Well Done" comments, even when I had not selected the answer for which I was being praised. I also was told I made errors on the same question.... and this was after I answered the question (Question 2, on R generic functions) the exact same as I had answered it when I took the course earlier this year. I was not a fan of not having to take a picture to submit work, so I am pleased that is no longer a requirement. I hope the typing pattern match is sufficient to affirm identity. I have one comment on content specific to this class. Week 3 content lacks relevancy to the project and data products in general. I agree that knowledge of R packages, classes, and methods is an important part of understanding R. I am not sure where that fits in the Data Science curriculum as a whole, though. Maybe expanding the curriculum to include a second, more advanced R class, with a project to write our own methods, build an R package, or do something with yhat. That would assign relevant work to reinforce the lectures. I would be happy to do further beta testing. DCP | but the grading was confusing. For | Quizz | 3, some questions came back with | Negative | -0.83 | 1.0 | 0.75 | 1.05 |
| 3Vo3Am1LEeWMPAqsmzmVew | Taken this course in its old fashion style. Now reviewing the new design was a little bit displacing, but I ascribe this to the fact I've done all the specialization courses in the old design. However the structure of the course is quite good. Some typos were reported, as well as a bug on the unanswered questions in quiz 3. Main worst point was the missing format of several text boxes. I would have appreciated paragraphs, bold and italic, some links, picture, not only raw plain text. Overall review is nonetheless over the average. | bug on the unanswered questions in | Quizz | 3. Main worst point was the | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 1.05 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Quizzes kept requiring information that was oddly specific (needing an exact decimal number without multiple choice options), which would have been okay except that it was not covered in the lectures. Ended up dropping course because there is no way to get through the quizzes if the information is not covered. | no way to get through the | Quizz | if the information is not covered. | Negative | -0.88 | -1.0 | 1.14 | 1.15 |
| 3vTfVlUsEeWaMw4b4yEpbw | Excellent Presentations! Answers for Quizzes are typically not provided in the lectures and extremely hard to find in the textbook or challenging to enter. | Excellent Presentations! Answers for | Quizz | are typically not provided in the | Positive | 0.84 | 0.5 | 1.14 | 1.15 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Very much enjoyed the course; the instructor used good examples and the content was relevant and aligned well with the subject matter. Enough examples and quizzes to reinforce the theories. I'm looking forward to follow-up with the 2nd course. | the subject matter. Enough examples and | Quizz | to reinforce the theories. I'm looking | Negative | -0.68 | 0.5 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Excellent Course with a good learning opportunity with Examples and Quiz at end of each topic | good learning opportunity with Examples and | Quizz | at end of each topic | Positive | 0.77 | 1.0 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Great course for an introduction on competitive strategy. Easy to understand and follow and the quizzes keep you on track. Recommended! | to understand and follow and the | Quizz | keep you on track. Recommended! | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | I have mixed feelings about this course. From a instructor and content perspective, this is by far the best. Tobias is a great teacher and he explains the concepts very nicely followed up by quizzes. What I hated about this course was the web exprience and how the final questions were set up. It gave a feeling that the intent was to "get you" vusrses questions that were more to see if a student has understood the concepts. Some of the multiple choice answers were borderline and a rational mind could go either way. So my suggestion is to significantly rewamp your quizzes. From a technical perspective, the system did not capture my results the first time, It graded me differently on the same set of questions (this needs to be really looked into) for example the first time I answered the question a certain way, it marked me correct, however the same answer in the next attemp was marked wrong??? This lead to a lot of confusion (and I am not saying because the numbers in the answers were changed on different attemps but the content itself was marked differently). I loved this course and would have loved to attempt the advanced strategy course however but for the above reasons will not. Its dissapointing that although the instructure and content is world class the technical glitches are too many for a student to have a seamless, learning experience. Hope this helps and topics mentioned aboove would be seriously looked into. I want this course to be a success as this the one of the most insightful courses that I have taken. | suggestion is to significantly rewamp your | Quizz | From a technical perspective, the system | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Very interesting and sometimes challenges understanding in the quiz. | and sometimes challenges understanding in the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Fantastic course except for the quiz questions. Many of them can be interpreted in a way that an answer different from the intended one can work too. | Fantastic course except for the | Quizz | questions. Many of them can be | Positive | 0.81 | 0.5 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5Ih5rOq7EeODsBIxORBKNw | Good course especially for those involved in business strategy. It requires attention and a lot of quizzes to be solved. Nonetheless all information shared by the professor can be useful and a knowledge advantage. This course can be taken by people who aren't familiar with business/finance/economics. | requires attention and a lot of | Quizz | to be solved. Nonetheless all information | Positive | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.47 | 1.08 |
| 5JJoCSsxEeWWnhJMxi0Z9Q | Great course. Good explanations and examples. The quizes and tests are not very easy sometimes, but they do you let think again. Very enjoyable! Just the course I was looking for a long time! | course. Good explanations and examples. The | Quizz | and tests are not very easy | Negative | -0.71 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.12 |
| 5JJoCSsxEeWWnhJMxi0Z9Q | Quizzes are great! | | Quizz | are great! | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.12 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | The data given in the first session was out of date, meaning that the quizzes were basically impossible (short of guessing). It's a shame because the structure of the course was nice - a document to follow and explain what to do and how to do it. | out of date, meaning that the | Quizz | were basically impossible (short of guessing). | Negative | -0.75 | -0.5 | 1.03 | 1.07 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | This course is nice but very lengthy videos and at one points i didn't understand some topics , quiz are pretty tough to solve . | i didn't understand some topics , | Quizz | are pretty tough to solve . | Negative | -0.68 | 0.0 | 1.03 | 1.07 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Good campaign for abolishing illiteracy. It would be good to update answers for the final quiz (BLAST search and phylogenetic assay). | to update answers for the final | Quizz | (BLAST search and phylogenetic assay). | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 1.03 | 1.07 |
| 5uXCfFu2EeSU0SIACxCMgg | Very practical introduction to bioinformatics tools from a biological perspective. Labs were excellent, and the quizzes were mostly well-designed. Only downside is that some required software/web tools are difficult to run on Linux, but that's unavoidable given the field. | perspective. Labs were excellent, and the | Quizz | were mostly well-designed. Only downside is | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.03 | 1.07 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | all video lectures feel like they are just read from a paper and it takes a lot of effort to follow and engage. It is the 4th course I'm taking to get ma digital marketing specialisation and is far off the poorest. The slides don't make much sense and a lot of times I have to research stuff again on other websites to actually get the point. The quiz questions are sometimes not related to the topic. It seems like, the professor does not know enough about the subject to speak freely and engaging about the topics. I'm quite disappointed about this course and can not recommend it. I think the course should be worked over. A great example of how to do it right is Aric Rindfleischs lecture, which was engaging, challenging and very well structured | to actually get the point. The | Quizz | questions are sometimes not related to | Negative | -0.85 | -1.0 | 0.67 | 1.05 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The instructor needs improvement on her presentation skills. She is just reading off the slides instead of providing more examples and scenarios to help student comprehend the material. I have to retake almost every quiz under her courses. In previous courses, I passed quizzes in one try. Please improve material or get a better instructor. | courses. In previous courses, I passed | Quizz | in one try. Please improve material | Negative | -0.77 | -0.5 | 0.67 | 1.05 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | For multiple modules, the questions were out of order. Some of the videos didn't seem polished to the point that it made me think it was not the final edits? Also, from other Coursera courses, I really valued interviews and summaries that highlighted the key points (vs a summary of the topics convered). Finally, the module quizzes didn't seem to highlight the key points, but instead had questions specific to not-so-important details (e.g., which agency created the MB campaign). | the topics convered). Finally, the module | Quizz | didn't seem to highlight the key | Negative | -0.88 | -0.5 | 0.67 | 1.05 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | based on impressions after module 1: -quality of lectures: just dry material from books. not engaging - repetitions (videos in reading materials and in lecture) sometimes feeling that it is waste of time -quizz questions are hardly connected to lectures disappointed and discouraged. give a try to module 2 and will see. | that it is waste of time | Quizz | questions are hardly connected to lectures | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 0.67 | 1.05 |
| 5_M54uIIEeSsKCIAC3iEqA | The course offers a good mix of media used for the lectures. The book that accompanies the course is worth reading. The assessments and quizes are good to handle when completing all lectures and readings. The course requires some pre knowledge. | is worth reading. The assessments and | Quizz | are good to handle when completing | Positive | 0.79 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.05 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | The course is a well thought and masterfully set of lessons on the main principle of journalism: it talks ethics starting from maybe old concepts that surprisingly are still fitting today. Being a basic course, it is very easy to follow and finish. Quizzes are alternating between very good and very bad. Tough ethical decisions and a space to discuss them is a really great thing, but peer grading two phrases essays with only the ability of telling yes or no doesn't make for a good use of the crowdsourcing the very course is advocating. The videos seem to have been made with an indecent knowledge of the technology, especially for journalists who are supposed to use it daily; green screens were used so badly as some parts of the professors "spark white", and slides are often cut away and put back in view while the teacher is talking about it, which was downright infuriating. It still qualifies for a very good opening course in journalism, but needs serious improvement. | very easy to follow and finish. | Quizz | are alternating between very good and | Positive | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.92 | 0.99 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | and it becomes super distracting. The | Quizz | are a joke. They usually consist | Negative | -0.98 | -0.5 | 0.92 | 0.99 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | You could just skip to the | Quizz | without watching a single lecture and | Negative | -0.91 | -0.5 | 0.92 | 0.99 |
| 6Fa6w3EjEeWbbw5cIAKQrw | Good: The video lectures cover a nice variety of topics giving you a good introduction of journalism, ethics, and other important considerations for becoming a journalist. Bad: The entire course feels hastily put together. Some of the videos have summarizing points, which is helpful when taking notes, but they flash on the screen briefly, then cut to a closeup of the lecturer, then cut back to the summery points so quickly that you can't copy them down and it becomes super distracting. The quizzes are a joke. They usually consist of 1-3 questions with two answers each and once choice so outrageous that they don't take any thought at all to complete. You could just skip to the quizzes without watching a single lecture and "ace" them easily. The assignments are also a joke. They ask for 1-2 sentence answers max! Some of them ask you to "use more than one word" to respond. I've taken free courses on here than involve 1000 word essays and then at least you're forced to process the information in the lectures. You can pass this course without watching a single lecture and that's a travesty to Michigan State. It is full of typos and oversights that could have been avoided if they had once person run through the course as a quality control. One of the quizzes has the answer included right beneath the question as a typo! The simple assignments are described in 3 different places, sometimes with conflicting instructions. They tell you what to do and how to review your peers in one section and then the actually assignment has different instructions on what to do than the page prior so you end up unsure of what the assignment actually wants you to do. For example: the final assignment at firsts asks you how to engage with your audience, and then you click next and the SAME question is now asking you how you distribute content. Did they even try?? In Summery: The content in the lectures are a good but shallow overview of journalism, but don't expect to be challenged to do anything but fill in ovals and regurgitate questions. Not too much to learn here. | a quality control. One of the | Quizz | has the answer included right beneath | Positive | 0.71 | -0.5 | 0.92 | 0.99 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | The course is good but the end of unit quiz are not accessible unless you pay. | good but the end of unit | Quizz | are not accessible unless you pay. | Negative | -0.99 | 0.5 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | It was too bad to not permit the students to perform the quizzes! Only if we pay for them! I thought the payment was for the certificate! | permit the students to perform the | Quizz | Only if we pay for them! | Negative | -0.89 | -1.0 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | The course way OK, but it had some flaws. It was very general and could have gone into more detail, but that was intentional, I guess. No big deal. Then again, the difficulty was way too easy and the quiz questions should be tested for test wiseness. What I disliked the most: The way Scrum was introduced and mapped to the role of a "product manager" was very confusing. Still, not a bad course though. | was way too easy and the | Quizz | questions should be tested for test | Negative | -0.9 | 0.0 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Want to know about different methodologies, practices and processes in software development? don't miss this one. Clearly explained, thought provoking quiz and memorable graphics. Absolutely topper. | this one. Clearly explained, thought provoking | Quizz | and memorable graphics. Absolutely topper. | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Amazing Course. So very enlightening and so very well taught. The quizzes help to reinforce the material learnt in the Lectures. The quiz question made it so that you had to constantly think critically to answer real world problem scenarios. Would recommend it to anyone to gain a good understanding of Software Processes and Agile Practices. | and so very well taught. The | Quizz | help to reinforce the material learnt | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 6lQZLjVvEeWfzhKP8GtZlQ | Amazing Course. So very enlightening and so very well taught. The quizzes help to reinforce the material learnt in the Lectures. The quiz question made it so that you had to constantly think critically to answer real world problem scenarios. Would recommend it to anyone to gain a good understanding of Software Processes and Agile Practices. | material learnt in the Lectures. The | Quizz | question made it so that you | Negative | -0.71 | 1.0 | 1.06 | 1.18 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I enjoyed all the sessions, quiz and assignments. Many Many thanks to instructor:). | I enjoyed all the sessions, | Quizz | and assignments. Many Many thanks to | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Basics were explained in a very simplified manner, quizzes and assignments were based on what was taught in the slides/videos. Excellent way to understand concepts | explained in a very simplified manner, | Quizz | and assignments were based on what | Positive | 0.64 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Well paced lectures and assignments . Quiz's at the end of every class keeps you motivated .. | Well paced lectures and assignments . | Quizz | at the end of every class | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Excellent beginner course for learning Python. The instructor slowly guides your thinking so that your thought process matches that of a Python programmer. Quizzes and especially assignments are relevant to testing your newly acquired skills. If you have a bit of experience in other languages, I recommend going quickly through the course, as I found a great deal of overlap in language that let me speed ahead. | matches that of a Python programmer. | Quizz | and especially assignments are relevant to | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is a great class for someone who has no experience with Python at all. Dr. Chuck does an excellent job helping you understand the core concepts in a manner that is easy to learn. The lectures are interesting, easy to follow, and full of great material. The quizzes are simple enough but you do have to pay attention in order to get them correct. The assignments were a lot of fun and made you think of how best to incorporate everything you learned. This was a better experience than I have had in other courses I have been through. I am definitely taking the next class from Dr. Chuck! | and full of great material. The | Quizz | are simple enough but you do | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Perfect course to start learning python. I cannot recommend this class and its professor enough. It is simple to follow, and all the quizzes and exercises truly help you learn python quickly! | simple to follow, and all the | Quizz | and exercises truly help you learn | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | a very very nice course made by a funny and good teacher, the course will help you step by step on learning the basics of python by showing you explanations followed by a quiz (not really hard but very useful for the purpouse of helping the user to remember the lessons) and then by a proper exercise, the only thing i would add it would be a specific lesson on punctuation and syntax of the python lenguage becouse a couple of time i've been struggling with exercises and the problem were indentations and some punctuation. Thank you a lot mr. Chuck, coursera and the community! | showing you explanations followed by a | Quizz | (not really hard but very useful | Positive | 0.85 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | While the videos are a good guide, the quizzes and assignments are way too easy. I find that, whenever I am studying, finding out how to do difficult exercises are the best way to really learn. Good course | videos are a good guide, the | Quizz | and assignments are way too easy. | Negative | -0.83 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Great course for those who have zero programming experience. The course is very well structured and designed to walk you through the learning process to more advanced material in the future courses. The assessment is done through interactive assignments and quizzes. I'm glad to have a privilege of taking this course and would like to thank Dr. Chuck, University of Michigan and Coursera for this wonderful opportunity! Thank you! | is done through interactive assignments and | Quizz | I'm glad to have a privilege | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Brilliant course, Professor Chuck is awesome. The amount of time he takes explaining the concepts is remarkable and the assignments and quizzes makes great sense. | is remarkable and the assignments and | Quizz | makes great sense. | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The course is a very good one for beginners in both programming and Python. The teacher is engaging and easily understood, and the material is good. The course could do with a more systematized "homework" system in addition to the quizzes and assessments, but a well-organized student has all the elements to do additional work by himself if needed. | homework" system in addition to the | Quizz | and assessments, but a well-organized student | Positive | 0.85 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I'm sure this is a fantastic introduction for those with no prior programming experience, but as someone with even just a little bit of prior scripting experience, I found it extremely slow-paced. Rather than suffer through the lectures, I did DataCamp's Intro. to Python and then did all the quizzes & assignments for this class as extra practice. | Python and then did all the | Quizz | & assignments for this class as | Negative | -0.89 | 0.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | The method of teaching, quizzes and assignments helped me to learn as much as possible from this course. Thankyou for providing this course! | The method of teaching, | Quizz | and assignments helped me to learn | Positive | 0.68 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Loved the assignments and the quizzes. | Loved the assignments and the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.88 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I do not have any background in computer science and this course was easy to follow along and learn the basics. I thoroughly enjoyed Dr.Severance's way of explaining abstract concepts and how we repeatedly go over concepts. The quizzes and assignments were a great way to review ideas in the book while giving us the opportunity to use our newly acquired knowledge. | we repeatedly go over concepts. The | Quizz | and assignments were a great way | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I really enjoyed this course and felt like I actually learned the material. The only reason I didn't give this course 5 stars, is that due to the issue of giving away the answers to quiz questions, there were a couple of quiz questions that I couldn't understand and unfortunately still don't. I think this is an area that could be improved. | questions, there were a couple of | Quizz | questions that I couldn't understand and | Negative | -0.92 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | i am really in love by the way they teach the method for teaching is so perfect by taking quiz ,assinments and all that helps students to know about himself/herself. and the bonus videos of interviews of great founders and CEO's inspire students to do something more creative for the next time and most important student's saturated notes. they helped you out to clear your concepts more precise so my advice to all newcomers is to take a brief look on notes. and also Dr. Charles Severance and his team deserves a hats-off for his hard-work. love this course....thanks | teaching is so perfect by taking | Quizz | , assinments and all that helps | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | There is some good material but the presentation seems a bit uneven; some parts are repeated many times at very slow speed while other parts, equally important, barely rate a word. The quizzes can be very searching and you really need to have paid close attention to every word (however quickly or slowly it passed by). I would have liked more practical exercises. The accompanying book is good and I am still looking forward to the other courses in the sequence which move further away from my limited knowledge of Python. | important, barely rate a word. The | Quizz | can be very searching and you | Negative | -0.88 | 0.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is a perfect one for people who are beginning to take their first steps in the world of Python (and programming, in general).. All the lectures, assignments, and the course materials offer quite good insight to basic and fundamental programming concepts.. And, considering the syntactical ease of Python, it makes programming easy to learn and understand, removing the extra clutter found in the more traditional languages like C/C++ or Java,, And, finally, the instructor, Prof. Charles Severance, who is more affectionately called Dr. Chuck just mixes fun and learning to create quite an exciting and memorable teaching environment, But, while all of this good, I felt that this course lacked the bite for a more advanced learner or someone who has spent sometime in the world of programming.. The complexity of the quizzes or the assignments are at beginner level... Best for complete beginners.. But, like i mentioned earlier, it is very easy to rush the whole course in a couple of days time or at most, one week for an advanced learner. This course lays the foundation for the more advanced courses in Python.. Technically, it is the first part of the Programming for Everybody specialization, which consists of 5 courses, revolving around the world of Python.. So, my final advice to all beginners is to take their sweet time understanding and grasping these fundamental concepts,, These form the foundation stone for any programming language as well as Computer Science world. Don't worry about the assignments, you will get more than ample time to complete them and succeed in them.. Plus, I feel that you will also enjoy some of the bonus interviews.. They could be quite motivating or thought-provoking.. And, for advanced beginners, you can rush through this course and brush up on some basic concepts to move into more advanced courses, which will not only be a lot more challenging and catering more advanced and diverse concepts and topics.. And, in my opinion, this specialization package could be, at this current moment, the best possible experience when compared to learning the basics of Python online.. And, could be the closest thing to a face-to-face learning experience.. | programming. . The complexity of the | Quizz | or the assignments are at beginner | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very good course for anyone who has struggled to understand how to program, especially in a self-directed/self-motivated way. This course taught by Dr. Chuck was broken down into concise simple sections that kept me interested, and I could follow along easily, with just the right amount of complexity in the quizzes and chapter exercises, so as not to discourage me. I've tried to learn computer programming using Java (inside & outside of a tertiary environment) with very limited success, but switched to learning python because it seemed more intuitive. So while i'm not a complete "novice" to programming, this course had the "Goldilocks Effect" for me. "Just right" :D | right amount of complexity in the | Quizz | and chapter exercises, so as not | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I enjoy that a very known author wrote this course. More than anything, I enjoy that the textbook is free and that the course materials are here for me to consume and learn at my pace. I also like the quizzes and the interactive checker we have for checking our code. Sometime I'm working off my phone and can't access a python interactive environment until I get home from work.z | my pace. I also like the | Quizz | and the interactive checker we have | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This is THE best course for beginners. I love the way Dr. Chuck has taught Python programming. His lectures are very interesting and easy to understand and the entire course has been a lot of fun with all its quizzes and programming assignments. His book is as great as are his lectures. I am looking forward to learning more about python through his courses. This is just the type of course that I was wanting to do for some time and I am lucky I found this through Coursera! Thank you Dr. Chuck! | lot of fun with all its | Quizz | and programming assignments. His book is | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Dr. Chuck is entertaining and makes this course so lively. Exercises and quizzes are good; not too easy and not too hard either. Feels like I started getting Python! | this course so lively. Exercises and | Quizz | are good; not too easy and | Positive | 0.65 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Good primer to Python. Quizzes were spot on and the assignments were clear. Highly recommended for a beginner. | Good primer to Python. | Quizz | were spot on and the assignments | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | Very Good Beginner Course for Python. Pretty short in material length but if you are looking to start programming I would strongly recommend it. Very good examples and quizes at the end of each section make sure you know your stuff. | recommend it. Very good examples and | Quizz | at the end of each section | Positive | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | I am very disappointed with this programming course. The course lacks detail and deepth and could be taught in 45 to 60 minutes instead of 7 weeks. The quizzes and assignments were to easy and basic (solved in less than 5 minutes) and definitely not enough. Annoying was the overuse of colours in almost every video (almost everything was coloured - highlighting everything is just as usefull as highlighting nothing, green box with white text inside - did you try to read that on a different monitor than yours?), the pointless and useless doodles, smilies and whatsoever, wasting my time by watching you dispose your teabag/drinking tea or coffee/talking about your mug/etc., why do you even need to drink in a 20 minute-or-less video. The Tutor tried to loosen a dry topic. Mostly it wasn't my humor but I can live with that. I had hoped for more :( | minutes instead of 7 weeks. The | Quizz | and assignments were to easy and | Negative | -0.7 | -1.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 7A1yFTaREeWWBQrVFXqd1w | This course is indicated to anyone looking for an overview of Python programming. All Assignments and Quizzes are quite simple problems. To be honest, I expected more of this course. | of Python programming. All Assignments and | Quizz | are quite simple problems. To be | Positive | 0.63 | 0.0 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | This is a rather pleasant course with a mix of advantages and disadvantages. For me, the advantages outweigh the negative sides. It slides on the surface of things, though, so don't expect to get too much 'in the know' after it. What I liked (and you might too) -> Short, visually engaging, clear in their purpose videos -> Interesting recommended/required literature/video content to solidify the concepts presented in the videos -> Comfortable layout of the transcripts so you can DL them and check them out as PDFs -> The course is focused on a very interesting, dynamic topic -- and lives up with a dynamic, fun and engaging approach What I didn't like that much -> Quizzes had some rather easy questions and as a whole weren't that serious. You can retake them -- you need to rely on your honesty to assess how much you've learned. -> The brisk nature of the videos is nice, but sometimes the narrative would jump from one point to another too abruptly. I still recommend the course for those who want to get their feet a little bit wet when it comes to innovation, digital affairs and basic entrepreneurship concepts. | I didn't like that much -> | Quizz | had some rather easy questions and | Negative | -0.71 | 0.5 | 0.76 | 0.84 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | My suggestions: ** videos: pace is way too fast, and without much visuals and a clear structure/plan, hard to fully grab in one view. I don't think your 5mn max duration really makes sense. When the content is of interest, better to make it longer to improve clarity. Positive: you provide written/text versions of your videos. ** support documents: way too many and not always relevant ** quizzes: i don't think that asking us the name of a founder etc. really test anything about our understanding of our lesson. Too many irrelevant questions. All in all, it seems you applied one of the rules you discuss in this course: release fast, and adjust later on based on customers' feedback.. Unsure this is the right approach when it comes to online learning. I had higher expectations vs. Mines Telecom. | many and not always relevant ** | Quizz | i don't think that asking us | Positive | 0.64 | -0.5 | 0.76 | 0.84 |
| 8GTGgDxOEeWdUgozVKt3nw | The course does a great job of curating very relevant videos and articles to understand digital from a 360 degree perspective. While all of us are exposed to digital from a consumer perspective, looking at it from an entrepreneur's and investors' perspectives completed the picture in my head. I liked the short video format, it is engaging and easier to schedule into our lives. Some of the readings were called "not mandatory" but were needed for answering the quiz! I would request not to have really long readings - some of them were very intensive papers written as part of an academic exercise and I will be surprised if any of the students, who are looking for many small and engaging materials would be interested in tackling really long non-man | but were needed for answering the | Quizz | I would request not to have | Negative | -0.78 | 0.5 | 0.76 | 0.84 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | There could be more work in the assignments in this course. The Quizzes are very simple. | the assignments in this course. The | Quizz | are very simple. | Positive | 0.87 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.88 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This is a great course and a daring venture for what is really an art form, beyond it's scientific requirements. This part of the specialization needs a little refinement. I posted this in the discussion forum. · 7 days ago · Edited First of all.....these guys running this data science department have their hands full. They are teaching live classes for students who have spent OODLES (lots) of money to attend this prestigious college . Johns Hopkins is about as good as it gets for a medical degree. Then they are doing experiments and other data science for the research division of Johns Hopkins which is also as good as it gets........THEN they are doing these MOOC courses on top of all their other responsibilities......Dr. Leek is a University of Washington Alumni, which is also top notch for Data Science. The video lesson is flawed, there is no denying it. But I must say these teachers are very open to improvement in the course and your comments on what could be better done are received and acted upon, so I would include them in your thank you letter to the teachers. ALSO I think these MOOC courses are best done by all members of the department contributing. Truly this field IS a team sport. I feel this course was good, but the videos need to be edited and scripted, so unnecessary language, which dilutes the core knowledge, that must be learned, is not diluted where questions are left in the students head about content when being tested. I learned long ago in a college calculus class that if your mark isn't perfect, it's OK, so long as you pass with a high score......even if it is the teachers fault. The course could use better video production with teleprompter scripting......maybe some AV students at Johns Hopkins could get on board. it will happen eventually I'm sure. You want to take a course that is absolutely one of the best courses I've taken anywhere and truly the best online. Try the number one business course on Coursera: GROW TO GREATNESS, either part 1 or 2, University of Virginia, Darden School Of Business...........A team created course with one helluva a teacher who is a business person, researcher and award-winning writer. I would recommend this course to ANY student and especially E-Teachers. The problem with this course is that there is a lot of information that can be included but may not be absolutely necessary as a "core concept". Needless to say, the more technical skills any employee has, the more insight they will have into their teammate's skills, as well, as the overall mission of the data department and the business it serves. I'm more of a tech and infrastructure person, I'm not real passionate about coding. I find it tedious. The more I learn about it, the more I enjoy it, albeit, from a distance. I can't see myself creating great blocks of scripts, but the more I know about how they are created AND what rules the code in a project must abide by, the better my skills will be as a data center manager. So I'm trying to learn as much as possible about R, Python, and companion programs like ggvis for creating visualizations. I'd say visualizations are an essential skill for a data manager, since you have to present results and projects, questions, and answers to higher ups and other departments. this link comes from the resource section of this course: https://www.datacamp.com/courses/ggvis-data-visualization-r-tutorial This link or URL is of much more value to me, than a flawed test question and a reduction in my 100 percent average in the specialization. Without this lesson, in this course, I would not have this valuable resource. Another great link, which has a great FREE print publication as well: http://www.processor.com/ ...these people have been advising data center managers longer than just about anybody ! Verbally and in the transcript are some nebulous statements that point toward the main idea, that concept being: the more any employee, on any data science or technical team member IS, a "jack of all trades", the better. So that could have been included in some more general way on the quiz, because really that is pretty much a general rule, I've found, working in ANY capacity in the tech industry. I have done a great deal of audio editing, working at numerous radio stations, with Adobe Audition. With others like: Pro Tools, or any other really good quality AV digital editor the result is streamlined, near seamless, audio-video, or one or the other. You just learn how to read and edit wave forms of all kinds. Years ago, in Dallas, Texas, attending Richland College. I learned a valuable lesson. I was taking a college level Calc-Trig math class being taught by the regular professor's WIFE. I don't know if the professor was sick, but this woman, who was teaching the class for the whole semester, frankly, was not qualified. I had always been considered an illiterate by my high school math teachers, a married couple who, frankly, were highly abnormal even on the geekiest scale. These people were acting like they were a world above most people in the class. Needless to say, I assumed, by their "adult" opinions, they were sent by God Himself, to educate me thru denigration. I was amazed, how 10 years later, in College math how well I was doing. I was carrying a 100 percent average ! So midterm this faux professor declares, "I'll be prefiguring all the arithmetic to be easy, so you won't have to bring your calculators !" SO I DIDN'T.......and of course the teacher's wife proclaims....."I didn't have time to make the arithmetic easy so you'd better use your calculators !" I literally had pages and pages of figuring in handwriting accompanying my 3 page test. The result was a C plus on the test. I angrily told the sub teacher "I did not bring a calculator to this test because you said it wouldn't be necessary, therefore I must be allowed to redo this test with a calculator !" She of course relented, "No that won't be possible...that's not a bad grade...." she continued, "what are you worried about ?"........ I was so peeved, I was going to drop the class. It was too late in the semester, and I was so disgusted with this woman's cavalier dismissal of my perfect grade that I just stopped going to class. The result was a failing final grade. Who ultimately suffered from this dilemma ? That, albeit, unfairly was me.....who created this "academic" tragedy, by the aggravation of a deeply flawed situation. Once again, that would be me. | some more general way on the | Quizz | because really that is pretty much | Negative | -0.85 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.88 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This class had hard quiz. Sometimes it seemed very basic, but some are hard unless you read and learn really well. Great class/knowledge. Practical real-life examples help. | This class had hard | Quizz | Sometimes it seemed very basic, but | Negative | -0.7 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.88 |
| 8LAp90EaEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Good interesting material but the quizzes were badly designed and did not test concepts well. | Good interesting material but the | Quizz | were badly designed and did not | Negative | -0.95 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.88 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | It is told that to take this course, basic computer skills like sending emails and downloading files are necessary-this is a beginning level course. Then, in the first module, instructors talk about polymorphism, inheritance and abstraction. For someone who have no prior programming experience, these are definitely not suitable topics to start with. Moreover, students are supposed to learn these concepts to get a good grade from first quiz, although they know nothing about programming. I had some programming experience, so I was already familiar with these subjects. But the lectures were too boring to keep watching. I watched like 10 videos and learned nothing about the course subject. I think I won't be spending my time for this course, which seems to me like reading some reference files. | get a good grade from first | Quizz | although they know nothing about programming. | Negative | -0.78 | -1.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | The course doesn't allow access to the quizzes unless you pay for it. I consider this to be contradictory with the statement that the free version of the course gives you access to all the material. Also, not being able to take the quizzes makes the course meaningless. | course doesn't allow access to the | Quizz | unless you pay for it. I | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | how I think it was. 1. | Quizz | are horrible. The fact we get | Negative | -1.0 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | very helpful. There are only 3 | Quizz | where I missed just one question | Negative | -0.92 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | something. Also while some of the | Quizz | answers are obvious from watching the | Positive | 0.62 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | background and out of all the | Quizz | I just missed 1 question on | Negative | -0.72 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | there was feedback after taking a | Quizz | I'm sure it would of helped. | Negative | -0.85 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Now that I have completed the course I'd like to give some feedback on how I think it was. 1. Quizzes are horrible. The fact we get no feedback on incorrect answers is not very helpful. There are only 3 quizzes where I missed just one question but no matter what, I can't get them correct. It would be helpful if there was some explanation why an answer your selected was wrong, a hint or something. Also while some of the quiz answers are obvious from watching the lessons, some are totally not and if someone doesn't have ANY programming experience I think they would find some questions almost impossible to answer. I have a programming background and out of all the quizzes I just missed 1 question on 3 of them, but I've been trying to answer them again, and again, and again and I just can't get them right. If there was feedback after taking a quiz I'm sure it would of helped. For those 3 quizzes, I took them so many times all the other answers are memorized and I just keep trying to get that one right. It's not helpful and then it turns into a "just keep selecting different things until it's right" thing instead of understanding it. 2. The course says it's for beginners to programming but I beg to differ. I think the way the material is presented and how the assignments are laid out I do not think someone(or not many people) would have gotten through that Week two ascii assignment. I thought they assignments in some cases were harder than the lessons. Maybe it's because they way they were explained in the lessons which brings me to #3 3. I do not think the instructors use the best/most clear examples to present the material to students. There are many easier examples to teach about looping than showing an Ascii art example. Because not only does the student have to grasp the concept of loops, then also have to think about ascii print logic. I think to someone with no experience would get pretty lost pretty quickly in this course. Some of the things explained in the lessons I would actually look up other videos of other people explaining it to get a clearer picture. 4. Some material is not consistent. Like in some assignments the text is wrong, for the Account code example, you never really mention the mOut or the interface the class uses which are in the example files and what to do with them when you write the other constructors (The course goes over this later when talking about the constructors and calling a constructor from another constructor but not that early on when you're working with the Account example files 5. It seems this course really isn't fully developed yet and is still going through it's growing pains Overall, I would say there are many other courses that are far better at teaching the basics of Java. For me, since I do have some Java experience and a programming background it wasn't too bad, But I'm thinking of the guy who has never touched a line of code before. I just don't think the course does a good enough job at explaining things to someone like that. I really hope the next courses in the specialization are better organized than this because starting with the next course because the next ones are more important to me than this course was only because of my prior background | would of helped. For those 3 | Quizz | I took them so many times | Positive | 0.69 | 0.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | I feel this course was severely misrepresented. This clearly not a beginner level class by any measurement. And the "4-6 hours" of expected student involvement is ridiculous. A beginner (NO programming experience) should expect to spend 15 to 20 hours on the first week alone and at least 10 hours for each of the remaining weeks. I have over 25 years of programming experience in Assembly language, Visual Basic, C and C++. I am clearly NOT at the beginner level yet I spent more than 11 hours on the first week, mostly due to trying to download and setup properly for the course. Also, there are over 3 hours of videos in the 1st week plus 3 quizzes and a programming assignment. If anyone spent less than 6 hours on week 1, then that was NOT the first time they took this class. I also am keenly disappointed in the restrictive nature of the assignments/quizzes. Having to type "-1*1+11" instead of "-i+11" (and you better not have any leading or lagging spaces!!) for instance. Bottom line, I would not recommend this course for anyone wanting to Learn Java for Android Programming unless you already know Java and just want some intro on Android development with Android Studio. And if you are indeed at the beginner level, do yourself a favor and start with introductory courses in Computer Science. | in the 1st week plus 3 | Quizz | and a programming assignment. If anyone | Negative | -0.63 | -1.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course. First time enrolled course in Coursera. I really enjoyed it. Lots of quiz and weekly assignment kept me busy for 4 weeks. And because of these ( assignment due date), i really learned by forcing myself to complete all in time. Quite tough on week 3, and i watched the videos multiple times and google the subject in order to understand the contents. Take this course, and struggle for 4 weeks. Will not regret. | I really enjoyed it. Lots of | Quizz | and weekly assignment kept me busy | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| 8UQBnm04EeWyAQ6K5KeLkw | Good course!!. the approach is well-balanced (no superficial and at the same time not too much professional). The quiz are done very well. | time not too much professional). The | Quizz | are done very well. | Positive | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.01 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | The course is very complete on it's subjects and points, but should have more slides and some times be more grafic about some examples, this makes the lessons boring and harder to follow because there is a massive amount of informations. Also have too much questions on the quizzes. | have too much questions on the | Quizz | | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Very well designed and implemented course. Practical and pragmatic. Videos interesting and easy to watch. Smart questions and quizzes that promote learning. The work load is not too demanding, but leaves you feeling like you earned the passing scores. Just right. Highly recommended. | easy to watch. Smart questions and | Quizz | that promote learning. The work load | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Great, informative class but way too many quizzes. | informative class but way too many | Quizz | | Negative | -0.92 | 0.5 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| a0fzUULWEeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This is a good course and I can get a brief idea what the position is the earth is. Also, I can remember some key figures about the environment situation. The difficulties of the quizs are designed suitability for student memorizing key point and concepts | environment situation. The difficulties of the | Quizz | are designed suitability for student memorizing | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | A most interesting and insightful course. The quizzes challenge the student, and give opportunity for individual thinking. | most interesting and insightful course. The | Quizz | challenge the student, and give opportunity | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 1.04 |
| A0IYf6jOEeSnlCIAC1EMbw | This is a really interesting course with current information about the state of terrorism and counterterrorism studies today and with an updated module on ISIS and what is happening in Syria at the moment. The history is an important aspect ,so having finished the course I feel I have a good overview of where we are and where we are coming from with an acknowledgement of the future. I wasn't sure that I would finish since one of the quizzes was so tricky but I got through it and learnt to revise well for the final exam. The videos are very well presented by Dr. Bakker and guests and the essential and supplementary readings very pertinent and enlarging.I wish I still had access to those materials as I didn't read everything I would have liked to but know I can at least refer to Perspectives on Terrorism online whenever I want to for current articles. | would finish since one of the | Quizz | was so tricky but I got | Negative | -0.65 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 1.04 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Excellent course, Kimberley provides interesting and action-oriented material while giving us a sense of her own branding and personality. The quizzes are not hard, what counts most is that you apply her advice! | her own branding and personality. The | Quizz | are not hard, what counts most | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 1.09 | 1.2 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | Thank you very much for this course - by far the best part for me was Week 2 when we were helped to really identify who we are and how we project ourselves to ourselves and to others. Thank you Kimberley for keeping the videos short and interesting (I find this vital to the success of MOOCs). I do however feel like the Quiz's could have been a little bit more challenging ;) | I do however feel like the | Quizz | could have been a little bit | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 1.09 | 1.2 |
| a0OJ1ha4EeWKlgqs7LdhRw | The backbone of the course was useful, but I thought the lectures were lacking depth. The quizzes were way too easy, you didn't even need to follow the course to be able to pass it. The extra articles and links were one of the highlights. | the lectures were lacking depth. The | Quizz | were way too easy, you didn't | Negative | -0.99 | -0.5 | 1.09 | 1.2 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Probably I am biased by just having followed edX's Minds and Machines. Compared to that course, the lectures here are superficial and not very engaging. This becomes especially striking for overlapping topics between the two courses. Also the quizzes are way too easy and you can try until you get it right. This makes the certificate virtually worthless, although you can pay for it. | between the two courses. Also the | Quizz | are way too easy and you | Positive | 0.7 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Really good course! Very much enjoyed it! Thank you for an amazing month! The only thing I would mention, was that at times the computer would sometime move the selected answer on the quiz, which made it frustrating on the last week's quiz and on week 2 (or 3 I think, can't remember it correctly) when it occurred, but apart from that everything else was fine! Thank you! | it frustrating on the last week's | Quizz | and on week 2 (or 3 | Negative | -0.78 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice | Quizz | are just the same questions from | Negative | -0.66 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | very little prep for the actual | Quizz | which are painfully pedantic for a | Negative | -0.79 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I almost gave this two stars, but the content of the course is excellent, and I didn't want to take away from that. To start off, for an introductory class, this covers a large amount and variety of material. It might be better served to break it up into even smaller sections over the course of something like ten weeks or even twelve instead of cramming it all into seven weeks. The lectures are enjoyable, but often they consist of nothing but the professor speaking. There are so many new terms, definitions, and ideas being introduced that it would help if these lectures also included slides or graphs with some of these ideas being broken down, as you would have in a regular class on a projector or on a chalkboard. Frequently, the practice quizzes are just the same questions from the video lectures repeated over again, and offer very little prep for the actual quizzes, which are painfully pedantic for a non-credit course. Every section has a different style of quiz, which is hard to prepare for. I am someone who usually tests well and have been struggling with most of these, even when I read all of the handouts and take notes. So, if this same course could be broken up over a slightly longer time and the quizzes could be more uniform, the lectures contained some slides, the course would be a brilliant introduction to philosophy overall. It's got all of the meat there, the presentation just makes it tough to digest. | section has a different style of | Quizz | which is hard to prepare for. | Positive | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I gave this course 5 stars because the content does match the description, a general overview of the topic of Philosophy. It introduces the student to the concepts involved with the study of and the approach to Philosophy from various topics. It does not go into any specific philosophers very deeply, and instead focuses on the general study or overview of what is going on in the "philosophical world" as of 2013. The course has not been updated, from what I can tell from that time. The Forums are "there" and the class is "supposed" to be live, but it did not have that feel to it. It was more of a "study on your own" experience and yes, we have a forum area. i found it not to be very active after the first week, (introductions were encouraged) but perhaps taking this course over the Christmas holiday (that fell in the middle of the course) was not the best time. I am near the end of the course and have put a lot of time effort and extra reading into it, but it does not seem this will be rewarded i.e by a certificate with distinction, at least there does not seem to be active involvement to that extent. 2-3 of the lectures had "extra"videos" of the professors addressing forum questions, but I do think these were outdated or from the first run of the course (?) as they seems to be talking about topics that were not necessarily in the forums at the time. I cannot determine that for certain, but, it was my impression. I would HIGHLY suggest purchase of the book that goes with this course, due to week 6, when clearly the topic is not entirely covered in the notes nor the lecture (my opinion only) and the book was needed to get thru the quiz. The professor that week had an accent and spoke very fast, and even listening in a slower speed did not seem to help much. The book is a worthy purchase, look for it on EBAY, or Amazon or a Used Book website. The book does go deeper on all topics and again, especially for week 6 and it is looking like possibly week 7 as well are best studied with the book as well as notes provided by the course. Again, this is an overview course, and it is interesting. If you are looking to study specific philosophers in depth - this is not the course. It is the course however to take before taking others or to review or learn what is going on in the area this area of study and it did hold my interest. As others have commented the final week touches upon time travel and the professor has introduced interesting aspects that involve the philosophical in this unit. Each week a different instructor presents information so you are switching learning styles weekly which is, I think made a more smooth transition if you actually have the book and the chapter that the instructor wrote. I would recommend it for at least another 6 mo to a year - after that (say 2017 perhaps the lectures should be freshened up, as new information may be out there, or at least they should tape something that says, "yes this was originally taped in 2013, however the info is still on target" or if not then add a lecture that updates the course to the latest in that area of philosophy. Overall, this being my second Coursera class I have found it to be of high quality, and worthy of my investment to obtain the certificate that is offered. And I do thank all of the professors who participated in this collaboration, it is again, a very interesting course that I think is a "must take" course if one is to really understand what is "going on" with Philosophy. | was needed to get thru the | Quizz | The professor that week had an | Negative | -0.65 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | I really enjoyed this course because contents were very interesting and contemporaneous. Reading about travelling time was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, quizzes and texts supported well my development. Congratulations. | was a real pleasure. Teachers nice, | Quizz | and texts supported well my development. | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | While the indidivual lectureres did have a breadth of knowledge, a manditory discusion should be held with the homeworks instead of just the quizzes for completion. Perhaps a page on each week should be good enough. Just to understand each lecturer's main points. | the homeworks instead of just the | Quizz | for completion. Perhaps a page on | Negative | -0.82 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| Auue1KA-EeS9VCIACyUcdg | Great explanations that is broken down with examples for understanding. Quizzes test for your understanding of the topic rather than just the textbook explanations. Challenging and thought revoking. | broken down with examples for understanding. | Quizz | test for your understanding of the | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.04 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Very little depth. I don't recommend this if you don't already have background in statistics or R. I really didn't learn anything. I mostly just gamed the quizzes and projects. | anything. I mostly just gamed the | Quizz | and projects. | Negative | -0.7 | -1.0 | 0.75 | 0.82 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | The material presented was of course useful, but I never really felt like I understood how it all tied together, or what the big picture was. I think that some case studies that show how all of the concepts relate to one another, or how they are used in the bigger picture would be helpful. Also, as a suggestion, I feel that if something is important enough to be included in the quiz, it merits more than the briefest of mentions in the lecture. | enough to be included in the | Quizz | it merits more than the briefest | Positive | 0.63 | 0.0 | 0.75 | 0.82 |
| a_xPWXNVEeWxvQr3acyajw | Better than Stat Inference, and gave some reasonable intuition, but could be improved I think by focussing on more understanding and less maths and formulas. Some of it did seem to be - here' s a formula, plug the numbers in to get the quiz question right, whereas in reality (in the world of work) that question is completely unrealistic - you have raw data and you need to do the regression and understand what it means. | the numbers in to get the | Quizz | question right, whereas in reality (in | Positive | 0.67 | 0.0 | 0.75 | 0.82 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | Great course with useful tips and organized materials. However, some of the materials (recommended tools, hyperlinks, etc) are outdated so it would be great if they can refresh them. Also, the in-course quizzes are too easy to the point it seemed quite stupid - please include more meaningful questions in the in-video quizzes. | can refresh them. Also, the in-course | Quizz | are too easy to the point | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
| bGZkCuIJEeSqWiIAC0gGHw | I am not impressed with this course so far. The quizzes and assignments are out of order with the materials being presented - the questions on each come from readings and lecture content that have not been introduced to the audience at that particular point in the course. The first module was a very, very basic outline of a generic analysis process, and really has nothing to do with digital marketing analytics in particular. | with this course so far. The | Quizz | and assignments are out of order | Negative | -0.7 | -0.5 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | Interesting course - good topics and novel angles used in approaching the topics. Plus intellectually engaging way of discussing over management issues. However - really annoying quiz questions. And good portion of the right and wrong answers were highly debatable - you had to know exactly what was the angle during this specific course. I still graded with 5 stars, hoping they will make some changes in grading. | management issues. However - really annoying | Quizz | questions. And good portion of the | Negative | -0.72 | 1.0 | 0.91 | 0.96 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | the other hand after doing the | Quizz | some times and observing the considered | Positive | 0.63 | -0.5 | 0.91 | 0.96 |
| BkWivH6zEeSXPiIACxeBkA | The videos were ok, reading materials added some value, although about three years have passed since the launch of the original course and the materials are all the same. I expected that something new would be introduced to give it a bit more value. But what is very questionable is the architecture of the quizzes. On one hand it goes way beyond the simplicity of the lenght of the course, assume a mindset that extends well beyond this course, and on the other hand after doing the quizzes some times and observing the considered right and wrong answers, some of them - to say the least, are highly ambiguous and express a personal point of view of the instructor in what is right or wrong (what by itself is not very reasonable), and lack ultimately in objectivity regarding the materials covered. I am not by any means saying that the quizzes are hard or simple, I am saying that they lack objectivity and go beyond the scope of the materials and try to put the student on a state of trying to guess what the instructor's opinion is regarding the question at hand. In some cases the 'best' answer chosen is absurd. Highly questionable this approach. Again, I believe that evaluations should be challeging, but these quizzes are a bit esoteric, they lack objectivity. Nonetheless, it is important to say thank you for being present in this platform and having the will to put it together. I wish you luck for the future. | evaluations should be challeging, but these | Quizz | are a bit esoteric, they lack | Positive | 0.7 | -0.5 | 0.91 | 0.96 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great course ! Easy, well structured, I also enjoyed different reading tasks for intermediate and advanced levels. Short videos, various types of tasks to complete - readings, quizzes, audios and videos etc. | of tasks to complete - readings, | Quizz | audios and videos etc. | Negative | -0.67 | 1.0 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great idea but unprofessional design and programming. Looks like nobody double-checked it before starts to offer it, especially for money. Almost every Quiz and separate questions has programming bugs. Waiting for ver 2 ASAP. | it, especially for money. Almost every | Quizz | and separate questions has programming bugs. | Positive | 0.71 | -0.5 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| bT0Wwd7yEeWlNQ4GEaPmcw | Great courses , well designed , explanations are clear and Exercices and quizzes helps to have a better understanding . I'm really delighted and grateful to have acess to that course | explanations are clear and Exercices and | Quizz | helps to have a better understanding | Positive | 0.87 | 1.0 | 0.98 | 1.11 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | While the course materials themselves were very useful, the quizzes didn't feel like an effective test of the material and consisted of very few questions, which didn't leave room for error (especially problematic because some questions were subjective). | materials themselves were very useful, the | Quizz | didn't feel like an effective test | Negative | -0.75 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Margaret Meloni was constantly looking down to read directly from a poorly-rehearsed script while trying to stumble through phrasing and lecture points. Considering this is a course about communication, this was very disappointing. The quizzes were vague and either didn't have clear correct answers or didn't feel applicable to the module to which it was assigned. After reviewing the material, I had to complete the quizzes by trial-and-error since the answers were not reflected in the lectures. | communication, this was very disappointing. The | Quizz | were vague and either didn't have | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Margaret Meloni was constantly looking down to read directly from a poorly-rehearsed script while trying to stumble through phrasing and lecture points. Considering this is a course about communication, this was very disappointing. The quizzes were vague and either didn't have clear correct answers or didn't feel applicable to the module to which it was assigned. After reviewing the material, I had to complete the quizzes by trial-and-error since the answers were not reflected in the lectures. | material, I had to complete the | Quizz | by trial-and-error since the answers were | Negative | -0.84 | -1.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Overly-remedial information, but that is not what earns this course such a poor evaluation from me. The poor evaluation comes from the composition of the review quizzes: The end-of-section quizzes ask questions to which there can be more than one correct answer, yet only a single response will receive credit. Example: "A recommended solution to a problem is valued by an executive because..." Followed by four possible answers: One of which is clearly incorrect while one makes an awful assumption. These two choices can be eliminated easily. However, the final two options are BOTH UNARGUABLY CORRECT, but only one was briefly mentioned in the material (reading or video), and thus only that one receives credit. Unfortunately, this demonstrates the course creators' desire to value a student's memorization of the instructor's own unique words over the student's assimilation of the course content and ideas. Course-takers beware, this course seems more tailored to stroking Ms. Bravo's ego than to you actually learning anything of commercial value. | of the review quizzes: The end-of-section | Quizz | ask questions to which there can | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | I think the teacher was very welcoming, but the content was less than enough to answer the quizzes. In the quizzes, every answer choice was correct and there wasn't any possible way to discern. What the teacher said and complemented with the lectures didn't match with the question answers. So, my score is "2". | less than enough to answer the | Quizz | In the quizzes, every answer choice | Negative | -0.63 | -0.5 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The teacher of this course talks toooo fast ! I`m for example a french educated student, so I prefer to take courses with a teacher who talks in a comprehensive way in which I can understand everything he says in order to proceed in my work and then to benefit everything in this course. Concerning the quiz, in the all of the quiz there is questions not related to what already said from the teacher or in the articles required to read. I red the articles coupes of time but in a specific questions, the answers, it seems, that we should answer from our own memory because badly it`s not mentioned in any article or in the video of the teacher. Thanks | everything in this course. Concerning the | Quizz | in the all of the quiz | Positive | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | The teacher of this course talks toooo fast ! I`m for example a french educated student, so I prefer to take courses with a teacher who talks in a comprehensive way in which I can understand everything he says in order to proceed in my work and then to benefit everything in this course. Concerning the quiz, in the all of the quiz there is questions not related to what already said from the teacher or in the articles required to read. I red the articles coupes of time but in a specific questions, the answers, it seems, that we should answer from our own memory because badly it`s not mentioned in any article or in the video of the teacher. Thanks | quiz, in the all of the | Quizz | there is questions not related to | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | Less required reading and more targeted lectures would make it great. It often seemed that the questions in the quiz weren't properly covered in the material provided. | seemed that the questions in the | Quizz | weren't properly covered in the material | Negative | -0.78 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | a nice "entry level" course lacking a forum discussion... was not even able to report some issue with videos and no explanation provided with quizzes results :/ | videos and no explanation provided with | Quizz | results :/ | Negative | -0.93 | -0.5 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| bzK7K9cYEeSV9iIAC0wBBw | It's a bit hard to answer the quiz since the presentation is not speaking about the qu | a bit hard to answer the | Quizz | since the presentation is not speaking | Positive | 0.68 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.94 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | The course is really helpful but I think it would have been much better if there were answers to all the practice quizzes since some of them are really challenging. | were answers to all the practice | Quizz | since some of them are really | Positive | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | The best course about mathematics that I've ever taken. The course is very interesant, the videos are very well done, the activities and quizzes are very challenging. I had seen sequences and series a time ago and I didn't like them at all, but now it is a complete different story. I really enjoyed this course and I recommend it. | very well done, the activities and | Quizz | are very challenging. I had seen | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I appreciate the free course, but it seems that this course is not comprehensively prepared like the first course. 1) There are no solution, and sometimes nothing at all, provided under the wrong answer of each task in practice quizs. And 2), the tasks are not 100% related with previous radios, which could be frastrating for people like me who want to solve all tasks before entering into the next session. 3) Some important points are missing in the video whereas less significant points are overdressed in excessive details. | answer of each task in practice | Quizz | And 2), the tasks are not | Positive | 0.73 | 0.5 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I give four stars rather than five because I felt that the course seemed less well executed than Calculus One by the same author. He set a high bar for himself. Still, I learned a lot and do appreciate it. I felt the practice quizzes could have been more helpful in the explanation of wrong answers as was the case in Calculus One. | appreciate it. I felt the practice | Quizz | could have been more helpful in | Negative | -0.7 | 0.5 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Very slow beginning and quite few gaps between videos and quiz but very nice to go back to basics and practice calculus again | quite few gaps between videos and | Quizz | but very nice to go back | Positive | 0.64 | 0.5 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Thank you, Jim! Very well prepared course. Well chosen examples and problems, but that's just my opinion. Nevertheless, problems and quizzes really helped me understand the materials better in this course and in Calculus 1 (MOOCulus). Oh, and it follows a free (open) textbook! What!? | just my opinion. Nevertheless, problems and | Quizz | really helped me understand the materials | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | Great explanation, challenging quizzes. May be very difficult for those who aren't used to grasping concept in maths. | Great explanation, challenging | Quizz | May be very difficult for those | Positive | 0.77 | 0.5 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| c9w_wD0cEeS9XCIAC0GF3g | I've completed numerous MOOCs but this teacher is simply the best. Very passionate and explains things extremely well. All the lectures look extremely thought out, topics are presented in somewhat funny, but really professional way, quizes are sometimes challenging, but that's great!. If you struggle with Calculus, you should definitely take this course. But it's also great for people that like Math in general - I've passed my Calculus stuff long ago, but wanted to recover that knowledge to enter different programming areas and that was one of the best thing I did last year. Jim, please add more courses!! | somewhat funny, but really professional way, | Quizz | are sometimes challenging, but that's great! | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 | 0.44 | 1.04 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | Course address some elementary issues about IoT, but the instructor at times seems like he does not have a good grasp of the lecture materials. No access to quizzes or evaluations as auditing participant, which is a shame since most of the Coursera MOOCs allow access to evaluation material under the auditing modality. | the lecture materials. No access to | Quizz | or evaluations as auditing participant, which | Negative | -0.64 | -0.5 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| CEwR00UZEeWb8RJf7Z1H0w | It is a really cool course, and i'm starting to really enjoy it, especially because of the explanations brought by the professor and also the difficulty on the quizzes wich doesn't show where you were wrong. wich means you'll review almost everything if you are unsure about your answers. thank you for giving us this great opportunity ! | and also the difficulty on the | Quizz | wich doesn't show where you were | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | complaint is that on the last | Quizz | the information given in the lesson | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | given in the lesson and the | Quizz | questions do not match up, making | Negative | -0.78 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | but then possible answers on the | Quizz | might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You | Negative | -0.82 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | Great course! My only complaint is that on the last quiz, the information given in the lesson and the quiz questions do not match up, making it a guessing game between two answers on some questions. Such as, the lesson might say something happens between the 1940's and 60's, but then possible answers on the quiz might be 1940-50's or 1950-60's. You get many chances on the quizzes though, so it's really not a big deal, just a nuisance. The heart and lung anatomy section was explained better in the videos than in my university lectures! | You get many chances on the | Quizz | though, so it's really not a | Negative | -0.75 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | a brief list of summaries on historical events of veterinarian and Dick college would help in learning the 5th session. Putting questions like those in the final quiz doesn't make as much sense... other quizes are wonderfully set. great entry course to be a veterinarian. | questions like those in the final | Quizz | doesn't make as much sense. . | Negative | -0.9 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | a brief list of summaries on historical events of veterinarian and Dick college would help in learning the 5th session. Putting questions like those in the final quiz doesn't make as much sense... other quizes are wonderfully set. great entry course to be a veterinarian. | as much sense. . . other | Quizz | are wonderfully set. great entry course | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| ClCx1sbdEeShXyIAC5MC2w | This class has the quizzes to help with the final test witch actually helps to learn the materials and the materials given at the end to print out is a nice additive and helps to memorize the information with out the computer | This class has the | Quizz | to help with the final test | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.85 | 1.26 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Great learning, easily defined concepts. Quiz section really helps you to retrieve core concepts. Thanks a lot Coursera. | Great learning, easily defined concepts. | Quizz | section really helps you to retrieve | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Very helpful course. I liked a lot. Although I would prefer for some quizzes not to be locked unless paid. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. E. | Although I would prefer for some | Quizz | not to be locked unless paid. | Positive | 0.76 | 0.5 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | thanks so much for this useful course i only hope to not make the final quiz with upgrade or with payment i need to see how much i achieve in this course. waiting for new courses, and thanks for your advanced for help, Dalia | hope to not make the final | Quizz | with upgrade or with payment i | Negative | -0.74 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This course was very helpful to me. My grammar and writing style has definitely benefited from taking this course. The modules were clear and well-paced, and the practice quizzes were relevant. | clear and well-paced, and the practice | Quizz | were relevant. | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I find this course quite interesting and useful! In this course you can learn not only by video and quizzes, but also play games and do interesting tasks. The education goes in an easy way and without any difficulties! Thank you! | learn not only by video and | Quizz | but also play games and do | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I would love to take the quizzes without an upgrade to see how I have done in my classes. | I would love to take the | Quizz | without an upgrade to see how | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Absolutely brilliant. I really recommend this course if you need to brush up on your grammar and punctuation. I didn't study grammar at school, (many years ago) as it wasn't in the curriculum, however, this is an informative and yet interesting way to learn. The course provides you with videos, quizzes, and tests which help to embed the learning at your own pace. | The course provides you with videos, | Quizz | and tests which help to embed | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | A great way to recap on your grammar and punctuation. Helps all writers on sentence structure and sentence variety. The quizzes and exercises are a great way to practice. | sentence structure and sentence variety. The | Quizz | and exercises are a great way | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Simple and accurate. The quizzes are not easy, but definitely inherent to the course. In other words, if you study and practice, you will be able to pass them. | Simple and accurate. The | Quizz | are not easy, but definitely inherent | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | I simply loved the methodology of this course. Being my first self-paced course with lots of quizzes and assignments and participation, I thoroughly enjoyed the challenges it posed to learn new skills. I have recommended lots of friends to join this. | first self-paced course with lots of | Quizz | and assignments and participation, I thoroughly | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Well designed and neatly structured. Lots of useful information in short time. Mixture of videos, exercises and quizzes was fun, and peers interaction was invigorating. | time. Mixture of videos, exercises and | Quizz | was fun, and peers interaction was | Positive | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| CQk7JA46EeWuEBJhzy2uFw | A good course for starter. Lectures are good, but the quizzes are too easy. | starter. Lectures are good, but the | Quizz | are too easy. | Negative | -0.83 | 0.5 | 0.52 | 1.24 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | on this site. For some of | Quizz | questions, you feel like you are | Positive | 0.78 | -1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | not make connection between lectures and | Quizz | I really wanted to learn java | Negative | -1.0 | -1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The most terrible course I have ever seen in my life and on this site. For some of quiz questions, you feel like you are dumb because you can not make connection between lectures and quizzes. I really wanted to learn java on coursera but It seems impossible to me. Focusing on rbg values and image thingies too much and making me feel uncomfortable at quizzes after watching all those lectures are the main reasons of giving 1 star. | and making me feel uncomfortable at | Quizz | after watching all those lectures are | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | No consistency, from very easy web design fundamentals to advanced Javascript with no explanation videos to help over a series of quizzes and assignments in week 3 lesson 3. | to help over a series of | Quizz | and assignments in week 3 lesson | Positive | 0.66 | -0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It is pretty fast paced, I wish there was more studymaterial to help prepare you for the quizzes. | to help prepare you for the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.67 | 0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | HTML, CSS and JS materials were covered and were made easy to understand. CodePen and the Write Your Own websites cooperate great with the course. The quizzes are simple while I found he coding practice challenging and yet not too difficult. My only concern is whether the materials covered would help to build a realistic website, say, the homepage of Facebook or Google. It seems though I've finished the course, I still have no idea of how those webpages I see everyday works, let alone code them myself. The following courses in this series focus on Java, so ... By the way, spending 2-3 hours for a week to finish it as soon may help against forgetting. HTML, CSS and JS seem disconnected before you make them cooperate. Cheers! | cooperate great with the course. The | Quizz | are simple while I found he | Positive | 0.89 | 0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | The instructors overly explain simple concepts and talk about programming inbetween makes the course confusing then you get lost and quiz you on stuff that was not properly explaiuned | confusing then you get lost and | Quizz | you on stuff that was not | Negative | -0.76 | -1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | It was an amazing Course. High quality videos, good practice quiz and interesting assignments. also the idea of final mini-project is very good. Thanks all of you for preparing this course | Course. High quality videos, good practice | Quizz | and interesting assignments. also the idea | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This course is misleading in a lot of ways. It is not for beginners at all. The quizzes in the course are beyond impossible. The lecture videos give an introduction to some concepts, but you are left on your own to figure everything out. They do not provide the proper tools to enable students to understand or pass. Reading through a lot of the discussion boards, there are two types of students: 1. those like me, who have never programmed in their life, and cannot figure any of this out, and 2. Those who have all sorts of experience and write things that are way advanced for a "Beginners" course. Do yourself a favor, and seriously do some research on appropriate programs before signing up for this one. It needs to be structured way better than what it is now. | not for beginners at all. The | Quizz | in the course are beyond impossible. | Negative | -0.88 | -1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Everything apart from Steganography was well explained with examples. I liked that the quizzes were fairly engaging and required programming exercises to familiarize you with the content. | with examples. I liked that the | Quizz | were fairly engaging and required programming | Positive | 0.91 | 0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | some of the quizzes felt haphazard and too specific, but overall, the material was timely and well presented. | some of the | Quizz | felt haphazard and too specific, but | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | This is a pretty handy introduction to the Web and programming. It contains pretty useful hands-on sessions. The instructors are very clear in their presentations and the quizzes emphasize on comprehension of the course material. I certainly recommend this course for anyone with no or little prior web programming experience. | clear in their presentations and the | Quizz | emphasize on comprehension of the course | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| c_rkuRoBEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Actually it's rather hard to understand how JavaScript works if you'd never learnt it before this course. And all this comments like "write a programm before start the quiz" hold me up to ridicule, because as a beginner I don't understand logic of writing. HTML & CSS are simple, so there's no problem here. | write a programm before start the | Quizz | hold me up to ridicule, because | Negative | -0.81 | -0.5 | 1.12 | 1.13 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | This course was very boring and very frustrating. Long long slow lectures with lots, and lots, and lots of questions, and no answers. The briefest of comments on potentially interesting people or topics, but no links to enable those to be followed up. Quizzes on concepts not covered in the material. Conflicting descriptions of assessment requirements. Discussion moderators who continually referred you back to the course material which did not contain the information that people were looking for. Before taking this course I could find only one negative review, which I dismissed as probably being a minority. Having taken the course, I agree with that review wholeheartedly. I did learn a couple of things, despite everything, but I would not recommend this course. Please upgrade it substantially. | enable those to be followed up. | Quizz | on concepts not covered in the | Negative | -0.67 | -1.0 | 1.11 | 1.14 |
| DmetrPp5EeScaiIAC9WIJw | Many great thought-provoking concepts of learning theory introduced here. The course is easy to follow, although the the quizzes sometimes contained questions that didn't seem connected to anything discussed in the videos - but I could have missed something, I suppose. I recommend listening at x1.25 speed because the professor has a very ponderous style of speaking. | easy to follow, although the the | Quizz | sometimes contained questions that didn't seem | Positive | 0.97 | 0.5 | 1.11 | 1.14 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | to completing a lot of the | Quizz | and final exam, its mostly theory | Positive | 0.68 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Was a better course than the other reviewers tended to complain about. Taking the examples literally might not be the best actionable route to completing a lot of the quizzes and final exam, its mostly theory on how to build sustainable and efficient systems while at the same time ensuring the security of them has the least effect on the usability of the information system or applications in mind. Some of the videos were somewhat off topic and seemed to not actually be related to what was on the quizzes at the end of the weeks topic. Some questions on quizzes weren't explained or only hinted at in the videos only to be the main topic in the next week. Other than that, a solid course. | related to what was on the | Quizz | at the end of the weeks | Negative | -0.63 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | Videos with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, quizzes were not accurate and poorly written questions. | with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, | Quizz | were not accurate and poorly written | Positive | 0.68 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| dPkbnh6zEeWP0w4yK2369w | This is a course for students with little or no work experience. I've been in the industry for twenty years and found some good information, but the quizes aren't designed for experienced adult learners. Not being able to discuss with the professor why an answer is incorrect or even knowing exactly what about an answer makes it incorrect further distances the students from learning. Given that one essentially spends an extra work day each week on the course, I expected more value for my precious time. This week I decided the value isn't there. I might recommend the course for undergrad students but not for working adults. | found some good information, but the | Quizz | aren't designed for experienced adult learners. | Negative | -0.76 | -1.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | This course was a nice introduction to the topic of being a software product manager. Unfortunately the quiz is not always working properly. | a software product manager. Unfortunately the | Quizz | is not always working properly. | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.64 | 1.03 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | This course gave me good introduction to software management. The lectures were clear and simple and quizzes were on point. | lectures were clear and simple and | Quizz | were on point. | Positive | 0.79 | 1.0 | 0.64 | 1.03 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | The Presenters are great. The compilation of whole video with graphics and quiz makes learning so effective and fun. | of whole video with graphics and | Quizz | makes learning so effective and fun. | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.64 | 1.03 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | Dry principles without real life examples and exercises. You can passed the quiz by just reading online or have basic project management experience. Disappointed. | and exercises. You can passed the | Quizz | by just reading online or have | Negative | -0.65 | -0.5 | 0.64 | 1.03 |
| DYv7azSfEeWgIQ7IEhB31Q | A bit too basic and quiz questions did not reflect the real value of what was being learnt but was just poised at encouraging us to memorize sequences of facts more than anything. | A bit too basic and | Quizz | questions did not reflect the real | Positive | 0.82 | 0.5 | 0.64 | 1.03 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | An ok introduction to Swift Programming, but I can see people who do not have previous development experience struggling with this course. Also lecturers were virtually nonexistent on the forums to help with questions which is disappointing since it is a paid course which implies you are paying for their time and effort not just the certificate. Best advice for people taking this course is to get through the material as early as possible and give yourself as much time as possible to work on the project, don't wait till the last week to work on it. Would also suggest the following changes to improve the course and help people understand the material better: 1. Have a programming exercise to complete at the end of every week to prove you have understood the material taught, a quiz alone with 10 or less questions is not enough. The course ramps up way to quickly with the project if all you have been doing is following the videos, students should be practicing and proving they know the work far more often. 2. Provide a clearer project brief since it was clear many people did not understand all the requirements. 3. Provide a video of what the final project should do in general to make it even clearer. Overall I didn't have a bad experience with the course, just disappointed that it was really bear bones, there were too few opportunities to prove your understanding, it was poorly managed and the lack of interaction from the lecturers a massive problem when they are being paid to help out, not just provide videos and forget about the students. | have understood the material taught, a | Quizz | alone with 10 or less questions | Negative | -0.64 | 0.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very disappointed. Having coding assignments weekly would have been very helpful. The quizzes often asked for information that was never presented in the lessons. The instructors were never present in the forums to answer questions. The final project asked us to do things that hadn't even been mentioned in the course materials. I would not recommend this course to anyone. The only reason it got 2 stars instead of 1 was because I did learn some Swift. | would have been very helpful. The | Quizz | often asked for information that was | Negative | -0.74 | -0.5 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | In my honest opinion, the quality of this course is not that high. You can expect to learn some basic syntax of Swift, and that's about it. There are very little material each week, and then you get a quiz, which is not the best form of examination nor for learning. I do not recommend this course. | week, and then you get a | Quizz | which is not the best form | Positive | 0.84 | -0.5 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | very nice course, not difficult quizs | very nice course, not difficult | Quizz | | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | code? ? (2) Some of the | Quizz | questions I don't find useful. For | Negative | -0.67 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Very knowledgeable educators. Course is given in a q&a style which is very very good for a web based course since the questions often are exactly what i want to ask. However, think the course can still be improved, especially in the following aspects. (1) examples in the course are not thought through ahead. Instead, educators came up with them on the spot. that way it may not be the best example to convey the message, plus the videos are made unnecessarily long in this way. Think it's good that for a programming course to show real time programming sometimes. But to do this all the time is a bit too much and therefore inefficient. Comparing to some other courses, think this one could really benefit if the educators could give some thought on how to teach, especially to think from a student perspective. For example: about the capability of overwriting and defining new operators, the example given was to define a knife operator and to overload plus operator to stew vegetables. Both examples do not make much sense to me. Although i did understand that it's nice that one can define his/her own operation/operator, when the examples came I actually got confused -- how do i stew vegetables with code?? (2) Some of the quiz questions I don't find useful. For this course I need lots of time to complete the quiz in contrast to other coursera courses I did. This is because i need to actually read the documentation in order to answer the quiz questions since they are really in depth. In this way, to do the quiz is actually the way to learn. But some questions are quite artificial, for example, there's a multi-choice question about "what are the different ways one can find help..." (3) Finally, I find the video and the quiz very abstract. that it's very difficult to follow without making a line of code myself... Also it is not clear what the educators expect as a pre-requisite for taking this course. Sometimes things are explained as if the listeners have no programming background at all. some other time, a concept is explained so fast I wonder whether i should have known objective-C in order to follow this course... | lots of time to complete the | Quizz | in contrast to other coursera courses | Positive | 0.73 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The format and structure of this class needs some improvement. Having to write some code each weak would be better than answering quizzes and doing the first lines of Swift at the end of the class. | weak would be better than answering | Quizz | and doing the first lines of | Negative | -0.99 | 0.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Unfortunately the course is not very well thought out. The lecture videos are poorly organized, concepts are not presented in the proper context and lack sufficient detail/depth, little thought or effort was put into designing the examples in the videos, there are no actual coding exercises until the last week, there are no examples of elegant code, nor thoughtful examples of good vs. bad code, the quizzes contain questions that are poorly worded and ambiguous (and I think some actually have the wrong answers and are contradicted by other online resources). It's very high level, and they hand-wave important concepts. I really don't see how this class can actually teach you to build a robust high-quality app. You're probably better off just reading some of the official documentation online. | of good vs. bad code, the | Quizz | contain questions that are poorly worded | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Basically a couple of guys have an unorganized discussion about swift. Little to no organization with poor coordination between lectures and quizzes.. Appears that there is no TA or course staff monitoring discussion boards... I am glad I didn't pay for the class... Disappointed though because I really wanted to learn Swift. | with poor coordination between lectures and | Quizz | . Appears that there is no | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | Impossible to follow. Quizzes do not relate to lessons. | Impossible to follow. | Quizz | do not relate to lessons. | Negative | -0.97 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is not as polished as most other courses on coursera. They occasionally give examples that are too small to see in the video. Most of the quizes dealt with syntax. I don't feel like any new skill was developed in taking it. If you are interested in iOS programming take the University of California, Irvine versions of this class. | in the video. Most of the | Quizz | dealt with syntax. I don't feel | Negative | -0.86 | -0.5 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm giving just a single star. I started this course with high hopes, bailed after the third quiz as I wasn't learning anything except how to pass the quiz. Sorry, but this was a major letdown to myself and two other colleagues who all signed up to take it together. We all bailed. | high hopes, bailed after the third | Quizz | as I wasn't learning anything except | Negative | -0.92 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm giving just a single star. I started this course with high hopes, bailed after the third quiz as I wasn't learning anything except how to pass the quiz. Sorry, but this was a major letdown to myself and two other colleagues who all signed up to take it together. We all bailed. | anything except how to pass the | Quizz | Sorry, but this was a major | Negative | -1.0 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | The lectures for this course seem unorganized and often had poor audio. The content covered in many lectures seemed off topic. Quiz questions would then focus on the off topic information making it confusing with regard to what material to focus on during a lecture. Do I focus on the proposed subject of the video or the many tangents about other topics. This combined with the unorganized nature of videos(just winging it) made the lectures distracting. The lecture videos are full of code that simply does not work in the real world and help from staff takes literally days to get(and not just over the weekend). | in many lectures seemed off topic. | Quizz | questions would then focus on the | Positive | 0.92 | -0.5 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | This course is poorly designed. What course on a programming language jumps first into how to use the debugger and what went wrong with a program? You are not introducing Swift, you are introducing xcode (and doing a terrible job of it). Also, I have been using xcode and Swift for 8 months now and producing some really good work, but I could only get 3/7 on your quiz because you have written questions with the purpose of tricking people instead of reinforcing or checking knowledge of the content. When you teach a new application, consider introducing the interface first. Explain what the various areas are, what they are needed for, and how to control them. This orients the user in the application and helps them to find their way around when they are trying to reinforce your teachings later. The presentation for this course is so unprofessional. It's like a running commentary on a movie instead of an educational presentation. I felt like I was listening to two geeks stuffing around and having a good time, instead of people who are professional teachers! I'm so incredibly disappointed with this course. Back to the wonderful work of Paul Hegarty from Stanford University on iTunes University and YouTube for me. University of Toronto - you should really consider what your teaching staff are doing before you unleash them on the world. | could only get 3/7 on your | Quizz | because you have written questions with | Negative | -0.77 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| eUI0xjeIEeWO-Qq6rEZAow | I'm sorry but the presentations were very poor and unprepared. The first quiz focused on rather unimportant and stuff which was NOT PRESENTED in videos, like keyboard shortcuts etc. Do not recommend. | very poor and unprepared. The first | Quizz | focused on rather unimportant and stuff | Negative | -0.98 | -1.0 | 0.81 | 1.18 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Great professor. Simple to understand and made me love astrology... Quizzes are a bit challenging though... | made me love astrology. . . | Quizz | are a bit challenging though. . | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 0.98 | 0.99 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Very interesting course, isn't too geeky and mathematical, unlike many other astronomy courses. The only thing bothering me was the inability to learn the correct answers and explanations to quiz questions. Some of those were rather mindboggling. | the correct answers and explanations to | Quizz | questions. Some of those were rather | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.98 | 0.99 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Not for beginners in the slightest. Enjoyed the videos. But the quiz just made me feel stupid as I didn't have a clue on any of the equations and simulators I was supposed to use. It got me thinking of how ignorant clever people continue to be! Every time a smart person comes up with a new theory it's taken as fact. Give it a couple of decades and someone will prove it wrong. The sun orbiting us proving wrong, easth is flat, gas giants only orbit outside the habitable zone etc etc etc. So when will we learn that just because something happens on this planet doesn't mean it will, has happened elsewhere. The deepest depths of the ocean have life forms, yet we'd perish. So who's to say life forms can't exact on a planet, moon that is nothing like the earth! The world is still at the centre of the universe to these academics! | slightest. Enjoyed the videos. But the | Quizz | just made me feel stupid as | Negative | -0.99 | 0.0 | 0.98 | 0.99 |
| euRJEycxEeWP8AqYi9cmiw | Too much time required. The first Quiz had almost nothing covered in the video lectures. I saved all transcripts and was unable to answer the questions. The Sim's... I have never seen anything like that and again - it most certainly wasn't covered in the lectures. Disappointed in this course. It took 3 hours for each segment of the first week... not 3 to 4 as was stated. Leaving this course. | Too much time required. The first | Quizz | had almost nothing covered in the | Negative | -0.98 | -0.5 | 0.98 | 0.99 |
| eWC74yvREeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Introduction course to other courses, not much to learn here. And also some quizzes question were never addressed on the content. | to learn here. And also some | Quizz | question were never addressed on the | Positive | 0.75 | 0.0 | 0.86 | 0.95 |
| eWC74yvREeWLVg5w1LoYqQ | Purely theoretical, I doesnt go deep enough, there arent any assignments, only a quiz at the end of the week. Poor material per week. | there arent any assignments, only a | Quizz | at the end of the week. | Negative | -0.65 | -1.0 | 0.86 | 0.95 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Very informative and liked the mini quizzes in between and the visuals as well. Made the learning experience smooth. | Very informative and liked the mini | Quizz | in between and the visuals as | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Course content was pretty detailed. I did not like that I had to write down pretty much every single word from each slide and that was said in order to make sure I could answer the quiz questions. Either the quiz questions were bad or it was taught in a confusing manner. I would go with the former. | make sure I could answer the | Quizz | questions. Either the quiz questions were | Negative | -0.88 | 0.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Course content was pretty detailed. I did not like that I had to write down pretty much every single word from each slide and that was said in order to make sure I could answer the quiz questions. Either the quiz questions were bad or it was taught in a confusing manner. I would go with the former. | answer the quiz questions. Either the | Quizz | questions were bad or it was | Negative | -0.99 | 0.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Thank you for encouraging me to continue the courses and quiz! I was moved by the motivational emails of the course for the first time since I started Coursera. Now I'm considering to apply to NC's online degree programs of public health, and change my career path. | me to continue the courses and | Quizz | I was moved by the motivational | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The course provides a good introduction to epidemiology. Both teachers are relaxed and speak very well, which is important for foreign students. I would add more intermediate ,practice exercises before quizzes, intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too much material before the quiz is not always easy. Especially formulas should be practiced repeatedly with some real life problems, although not too difficult ones, in line with the purpose of the course. | more intermediate , practice exercises before | Quizz | intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too | Positive | 0.87 | 0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The course provides a good introduction to epidemiology. Both teachers are relaxed and speak very well, which is important for foreign students. I would add more intermediate ,practice exercises before quizzes, intermingling them with lectures. Absorbing too much material before the quiz is not always easy. Especially formulas should be practiced repeatedly with some real life problems, although not too difficult ones, in line with the purpose of the course. | Absorbing too much material before the | Quizz | is not always easy. Especially formulas | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I enjoyed hearing about epidemiology, but didn't find the quizzes very useful. I was expecting more practice doing computation or examining case studies. The lectures also had no time in between slides to pause, write notes, and make sure I understood what was just said. I liked that the lectures were well organized and the review questions in between the topics of discussion. | about epidemiology, but didn't find the | Quizz | very useful. I was expecting more | Negative | -0.75 | 0.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | I thought this was a good basic level introduction course. One suggestion is to update the quiz section to be able to click on the questions that were answered incorrectly and see the correct answer with explanation (after passing). | One suggestion is to update the | Quizz | section to be able to click | Positive | 0.87 | 0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | time spent on that and more | Quizz | questions on that. The reason I | Negative | -0.96 | -0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | stars is that I felt the | Quizz | were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they | Negative | -0.92 | -0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | The content was really neat and definitely not something I had been exposed to before. I really liked the quantitative parts of the course and wish there had been more time spent on that and more quiz questions on that. The reason I am ranking this 2 stars is that I felt the quizzes were unreasonably difficult (or perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 quiz I had to take multiple times and really couldn't figure out what the correct answer was. Looking at the discussion boards I believe my sentiment is shared. I have taken multiple coursera classes (Astronomy, Astrobiology, Calculus) and these are by far the most difficult quizes I have encountered. | perhaps they had bugs). Week 2 | Quizz | I had to take multiple times | Negative | -0.91 | -0.5 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| FjD-ZB8oEeScWCIACnuVZQ | Tough quizzes but its well said "you need to heat and beat the iron to re-shape". its totally worth your effort. | Tough | Quizz | but its well said " you | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Firstly, I'd like to thank the professor for bringing us such a great class on linguistics! The course gives a general introduction on what linguistics is about in quite a balanced depth, not too deep to scare people away while not too shallow that you may feel boring. The missing star is due to some vague instructions of quizzes. | due to some vague instructions of | Quizz | | Negative | -0.68 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | A great course, it contains very broad discussion of the problems of linguistics. Quite demanding quizes force students to watch videos carefully and to read the required reading. This leads to better understanding of the matter. The videos in the course are great too, the explanation of prof. Oostendorp is very lively and entertaining. The interviews with specialists are unique. | the problems of linguistics. Quite demanding | Quizz | force students to watch videos carefully | Positive | 0.64 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | I really liked it ! It was a challenge for me personally ! Getting the questions wrong on quizes really discouraged me but then I would keep going and not give up ! Awesome !!! | ! Getting the questions wrong on | Quizz | really discouraged me but then I | Negative | -0.86 | 1.0 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Interesting content, but issues with broken links needed to complete quizzes while they were due. Needs better explanation of how to use other resources. Many of the quiz questions are arbitrary, rather than really testing knowledge gained in the class. The lectures are still useful, and would recommend doing this as a free course, but see no use in paying for a certificate on completion of the course. | with broken links needed to complete | Quizz | while they were due. Needs better | Negative | -0.85 | -0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course is a lightweight introduction to Linguistics. If you are absolutely new to linguistics, it will provide you with enough information for further research and self-development. There are some really interesting facts provided by the required reading of the course. What I mostly liked about the course is the list of additional literature. What I mostly didn't like are quizzes - I little bit too reliant on the question formulation. The only quiz that I really liked was about syntactic analysis of informants' sentences. | What I mostly didn't like are | Quizz | - I little bit too reliant | Negative | -0.66 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course is a lightweight introduction to Linguistics. If you are absolutely new to linguistics, it will provide you with enough information for further research and self-development. There are some really interesting facts provided by the required reading of the course. What I mostly liked about the course is the list of additional literature. What I mostly didn't like are quizzes - I little bit too reliant on the question formulation. The only quiz that I really liked was about syntactic analysis of informants' sentences. | on the question formulation. The only | Quizz | that I really liked was about | Positive | 0.81 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | VERY good content and classes! Some questions in the quizzes are confusing, and there was the trouble with the required reading for Week 3. The first Honors assignment is confusing - specially its very last input question. | and classes! Some questions in the | Quizz | are confusing, and there was the | Negative | -0.98 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Some of the material could be a bit more analytical, and there were a few problems with the quiz questions. Other than that, perfect! Great introduction to linguistics. Thank you for your hard work! | were a few problems with the | Quizz | questions. Other than that, perfect! Great | Negative | -0.67 | 1.0 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | some problems in quiz part are confusing... but nice course in general | some problems in | Quizz | part are confusing. . . but | Negative | -0.71 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Despite some technical difficulties with the forum and the quiz, the actual course was so AMAZINGLY interesting that it has motivated me to take up linguistics in the future. I didn't lose interest even once for the entirety of the six weeks I spent on this course! | difficulties with the forum and the | Quizz | the actual course was so AMAZINGLY | Positive | 0.87 | 1.0 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | Excellent and most enjoyable course! The videos of the professor and his students are clear and fluent and even the quiz are not too hard. And the best part are the informants in various languages one does not encounter every day. The course is mostly recommended to all. | clear and fluent and even the | Quizz | are not too hard. And the | Negative | -0.64 | 1.0 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course was often confusing and the quizzes came down to a question of trial and error. I found this very frustrating. Although the topics were interesting, I didn't find them very well presented in spite of the enthusiasm of the lecturer. But there was a lot of ambiguity and bias and the inability to discuss except through the forums was off-putting. It wouild be good to know why answers were wrong in the quizzes particulalry when you had put a lot of effort into studying them. In the final exam, there are questions which are evidently wrong, both in their wording and in their marking and nothing has been done to remedy this in spite of the complaints in the discussion page. | course was often confusing and the | Quizz | came down to a question of | Negative | -0.87 | -0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| fM5baJoUEeW93wo8Ha4kow | The course was often confusing and the quizzes came down to a question of trial and error. I found this very frustrating. Although the topics were interesting, I didn't find them very well presented in spite of the enthusiasm of the lecturer. But there was a lot of ambiguity and bias and the inability to discuss except through the forums was off-putting. It wouild be good to know why answers were wrong in the quizzes particulalry when you had put a lot of effort into studying them. In the final exam, there are questions which are evidently wrong, both in their wording and in their marking and nothing has been done to remedy this in spite of the complaints in the discussion page. | why answers were wrong in the | Quizz | particulalry when you had put a | Negative | -0.68 | -0.5 | 0.78 | 1.01 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Very interesting course, that covers the broad fundamentals of Urban Infrastructures. I liked how the content was made relevant by case-studies and quizzes that focus on your city. | was made relevant by case-studies and | Quizz | that focus on your city. | Positive | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.83 | 1.01 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Videos and quizes are too long and too large | Videos and | Quizz | are too long and too large | Negative | -0.84 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.01 |
| FOGKYF0gEeWK1woL5P9cGQ | Good balance between presentations and interviews. The quality of the reading materials was well above my previous Coursera courses (great handouts from Iglus!). The scope could be extended to other urban infrastructure systems. Appropriate quizzes. Final exam could be slightly more demanding (less straightforward). Overall very good. | to other urban infrastructure systems. Appropriate | Quizz | Final exam could be slightly more | Positive | 0.77 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.01 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The lectures weren't always easy to follow but the quizzes were really useful as they meant it was necessary to understand the material. Definitely a useful course, I will be interested to see how it relates to the real world of derivatives pricing. | always easy to follow but the | Quizz | were really useful as they meant | Positive | 0.96 | 0.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent course for students with some finance background. Content is nicely paced and well illustrated through models and examples. The quizzes range from straight forward application to challenging (given there is no feedback on where you got a question incorrect). | illustrated through models and examples. The | Quizz | range from straight forward application to | Positive | 0.67 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent material with high quality quizzes. Highly recommended. | Excellent material with high quality | Quizz | Highly recommended. | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | I wish it could be harder and have more challenging quizzes than simply arithmetic and multiple choice. | be harder and have more challenging | Quizz | than simply arithmetic and multiple choice. | Negative | -0.63 | 0.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Excellent approach, robust presentation, demanding but rewarding quizzes, overall a valuable course. A slight drawback is of technical nature and is responsibility of the host platform: a couple of module videos contain wrong subtitles. Nevertheless, both teacher speak clear English, and it wouldn't be hard for most participants to follow. | approach, robust presentation, demanding but rewarding | Quizz | overall a valuable course. A slight | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The material covered in the course is highly relevant to the current job market. Professors Haugh & Iyengar were great at explaining the material and the quizzes were reasonably difficult. The learning spreadsheets were very good as well. Overall, it was a great learning experience and I will enthusiastically recommend it to my colleagues. | at explaining the material and the | Quizz | were reasonably difficult. The learning spreadsheets | Negative | -0.74 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Very well presented, structured and selected material, easy to follow, relevant and interesting. Quizz problems are well thought through and have a reasonable degree of difficulty and length. | easy to follow, relevant and interesting. | Quizz | problems are well thought through and | Positive | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | The course provides a very thorough introduction on the basic models and mechanisms by which various financial products are priced. One issue I had, was that the quiz questions sometimes used terminology or jargon for which the link with the material covered in the videos was not always immediately obvious. Also, the course, especially the later modules, heavily relies on Microsoft Excel, which some people might not be willing to pay hard cash for. It is possible to pass by doing the assignments with e.g. Python, but it's a lot of work, and not for the faint of heart. | issue I had, was that the | Quizz | questions sometimes used terminology or jargon | Negative | -0.63 | 0.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | course needs problems with explanations and/or better feedback on quizzes. there is no way to tell what error one has made - it could even be rounding. a student forum might be helpful, too. application of some formulas is not clear, leading to errors on quizzes. in some cases I have used external resources to give me a way to achieve the correct result | with explanations and/or better feedback on | Quizz | there is no way to tell | Negative | -0.95 | -0.5 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | course needs problems with explanations and/or better feedback on quizzes. there is no way to tell what error one has made - it could even be rounding. a student forum might be helpful, too. application of some formulas is not clear, leading to errors on quizzes. in some cases I have used external resources to give me a way to achieve the correct result | not clear, leading to errors on | Quizz | in some cases I have used | Negative | -0.74 | -0.5 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Very interesting. The quizzes after each model compels me to learn and research more. | Very interesting. The | Quizz | after each model compels me to | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | I would like to see the discussion forum back. That will help debugging the answers to the quiz. | help debugging the answers to the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.74 | 0.5 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GEfA2A0UEeSWFyIACpBHcA | Im really fascinated with this course. By the way, i think some quiz have few mistakes as the module about pricing swaptions in the calibration model. The answer the professor gave is not 13300 or 19400, but 1330 or 1940 respectively. The quiz#6, the answer for the question 1 and 2 is multiple, its between a range and i cant complete it, please check the parameters again. | By the way, i think some | Quizz | have few mistakes as the module | Positive | 0.68 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.07 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is an excellent course indeed. Access to real world data is a huge +. Some of the questions in the quizzes were difficult though. And also the witty jokes by the Prof... :):) | Some of the questions in the | Quizz | were difficult though. And also the | Positive | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Really useful and practical course. The exercises and quizes are the best in all the courses I've taken. | and practical course. The exercises and | Quizz | are the best in all the | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Amazing course and the quizzes are challenging. Learned a lot. Gives hands on experience on mysql and Teradata. | Amazing course and the | Quizz | are challenging. Learned a lot. Gives | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I found the first 4 weeks of the course amazing: just really well structured, thought-out, and delivered in a way that positions the student for success. Jana breaks the material down into digestible bits, gives you sufficient practice, and even if you don't get it, you can look at the answers to the practice questions and figure out where your thinking was incorrect. The 5th week wasn't as well broken down, especially the last set of Teradata exercises. New concepts or ways of structuring queries were being introduced in those exercises, but there was no way to check for a correct solution if I couldn't come with one on my own (which was unfortunately half of the time). I still got a good grade on my last quiz, but I can't say that I really truly learned how to write the more complicated queries. I would suggest that the last Teradata exercise set has more explanation or perhaps just answers that the student can refer to in order to understand why his/her line of thinking isn't working. Otherwise, a truly fantastic course. I 100% recommend it. | a good grade on my last | Quizz | but I can't say that I | Negative | -0.94 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The exercises , quizzes and videos are well planned and help understand the course material. | The exercises , | Quizz | and videos are well planned and | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I liked it, but couldnt even submit quizzes if you don't pay ! | liked it, but couldnt even submit | Quizz | if you don't pay ! | Positive | 0.74 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The video instruction are not as helpful as I wished. They were too brief, and all the learning end up with doing the exercises. The regular exercises and the quizzes use different database system, and it sometimes hard to transfer what you learn to the quizzes. The pre-quiz exercises are more helpful imo, but no answer key is provided. Sometimes I am still confused even after passing the quiz. | exercises. The regular exercises and the | Quizz | use different database system, and it | Positive | 0.87 | 0.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | I have a theoretical background in relational algebra and SQL. This course did a great job of actually applying that theory in practice in the form of business situations. By using real life data, it also accurately presented raw data as not perfectly organized or "clean". Filtering with subqueries, IN, WHERE, and OUTER JOIN statements are absolutely crucial in cleaning data in real life situations; this course did an excellent job of demonstrating that importance. I have 2 interrelated critiques however: The usage of 2 different platforms (MySQL for the exercises and Teradata for the quizzes) was very confusing given their distinct syntaxes. I think it would have been more powerful to have the exercises and quizzes on the same platform. Furthermore, the Teradata platform was oftentimes overwhelmed by the number of users and frequently crashed. Going forward I would recommend either ensuring that the servers can handle the amount of user-load, or switching over to the MySQL platform entirely. | powerful to have the exercises and | Quizz | on the same platform. Furthermore, the | Positive | 0.72 | 0.5 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| GplkvRnqEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | great course. great example databases. i would suggest renaming the course Managing Big Data with MySQL and TeraData. The Teradata component of the course was very heavy, and all graded pieces of the course used Teradata. I would also make the assignments graded --- they can be peer reviewed. I think doing the assignments really help, not just completing the quizzes. those are my thoughts. | really help, not just completing the | Quizz | those are my thoughts. | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 0.49 | 1.2 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course developed by Andrew Ng is quite interesting, going to the essentials in order student get the big picture and the essential tools for building the backbone of future ML applications. Of course, being confident with mathematics principles and notations will be helpful but most of the time, it's not an issue if you have the minimal knowledge. What it lacks on Coursera is the next stage of this course where we could investigate further the technologies presented but in more technical way. Maybe we might see that in the future... Regarding course supports (videos, forums ...), they are of good quality and the fact Andrew used them by drawing on slides helps to have a better understanding. We could notice that there are few minor errors (eg: a "j" index which becomes "i" in J(theta) writing) and I think the technical slides on Back propagation could be improved if a dedicated slide to used mathematical notations / definitions. Sometimes, there are some errors which could induce some confusions. But these minors errors don't hide the impressive work done by Andrew. Regarding assessments, quizzes could be tricky if you don't got the "spirit" (not an exam habit in France) and coding exercises are well structured in order the student will focus on the core modules of the lesson and not on information flow. These exercises are inspiring if you're interesting in teaching and inspiring for Data Scientist Apprentices if you investigate the utils functions developed to support the exercise. Many thanks for this great course and I hope my two cents will help other people to attend it Bruno | work done by Andrew. Regarding assessments, | Quizz | could be tricky if you don't | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | About me: I studied computer science in Dortmund, Germany in the 90ies. I recommend this course to everyone who wants to have a very good understanding of machine learning. A little bit of advice, if you have never learned linear algebra on a university level, you should at least try to get a basic understanding of it before starting this course. I was happy that I remembered stuff, learning it from scratch in 1 or 2 weeks would be difficult, I assume. +: * Mathematical basics of machine learning are very well explained * Andrew Ng is a very good professor, he explains the topic very well and thoroughly * It is not limited by using a special framework or language * The support in the forums, and the transcription of the talks, and all the material that is given to you is really excellent. -: * I would be happy if the programming exercises would be a bit more fun, currently it feels like translating / transforming math formulas into octave, which is fine, but not very fun. Having said that I am only in week 4, perhaps this will happen later * some text questions in the multiple choice quizzes require a precise understanding of the english language, especially in regards to math, I am not a native speaker, so these questions feel especially hard for me | text questions in the multiple choice | Quizz | require a precise understanding of the | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It's very helpful to build a knowledge of ML. The video and quiz are all challenging to complete if you want to get the full score. Appreciate it, Pro Andrew | knowledge of ML. The video and | Quizz | are all challenging to complete if | Negative | -0.79 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very interesting introduction to Machine Learning. All lecture notes are beautifully presented by Andrew Ng. I have truly enjoyed his style. Quizzes and programming exercises are good | I have truly enjoyed his style. | Quizz | and programming exercises are good | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you Prof. Ng and Mentors that your effort to educate - well designed course, teaching, quizzes and exercises to help us understand essence of ML. I am not a computer scientist graduate student / graduate but I am interested in data. This course will start my new direction of research and work. Good luck to all of you who encounter this course! | educate - well designed course, teaching, | Quizz | and exercises to help us understand | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Incredible... complex subject ... taught in a simplified way without trivialising the subject matter... practical examples and tips help a lot... beautifully relates the mathematics behind the algorithms to real-life scenarios. Hands-on programming assignments and quizzes are thoughtfully crafted and organised.. Great Learning. Thank you very much. | real-life scenarios. Hands-on programming assignments and | Quizz | are thoughtfully crafted and organised. . | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | One of the best mooc that I have taken till date. Thanks a lot for Andrew Ng and team to make this high quality class accessible to everyone. Learnt a great deal from the lecture videos, assignments, quiz, tutorials & test cases. I highly recommend to people who are just starting to explore ML for learning or to make a career out of it. Thanks again Andrew Ng, Team and Coursera | deal from the lecture videos, assignments, | Quizz | tutorials & test cases. I highly | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course presents in a very accessible way a variety of ML techniques. It is definitely a good introductory course. The programming assignments could have been harder and the quizes could have required some harder calculations in hand. | could have been harder and the | Quizz | could have required some harder calculations | Negative | -0.92 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course. The instructor Andrew Ng carries you through the material in easy to understand lectures that are divided by topic in perfectly timed video sessions with individual quizzes during each video that help you gauge how well you have understood and grasped the topic discussed in the lesson. This prepares you to take the graded quizzes and complete the programming projects. The programming projects have great documentation that enhance the learning experience and illustrate applications of the material just learned. I greatly recommend this course! | perfectly timed video sessions with individual | Quizz | during each video that help you | Positive | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a great course. The instructor Andrew Ng carries you through the material in easy to understand lectures that are divided by topic in perfectly timed video sessions with individual quizzes during each video that help you gauge how well you have understood and grasped the topic discussed in the lesson. This prepares you to take the graded quizzes and complete the programming projects. The programming projects have great documentation that enhance the learning experience and illustrate applications of the material just learned. I greatly recommend this course! | prepares you to take the graded | Quizz | and complete the programming projects. The | Negative | -0.63 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The videos are of a helpful length and they are organized into lessons with constructive quiz questions and assignments interspersed to make a student progress logically and incrementally through the course. I found the mentors' guidance helpful to bridge the gap between video lectures and programming assignments. | are organized into lessons with constructive | Quizz | questions and assignments interspersed to make | Negative | -0.82 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a very fundamental introduction of machine learning. The course materials are suitable for beginners who are interested in machine learning. Going through all the quiz and programming assignments is not easy but they are really helpful for understanding the learning materials. | machine learning. Going through all the | Quizz | and programming assignments is not easy | Positive | 0.72 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very easy to understand, with little math needed. I enjoy the fact that he allows access to all quizzes and assignments without having to pay. | that he allows access to all | Quizz | and assignments without having to pay. | Positive | 0.91 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | great lectures, and great quiz and assignment to help me learn more. | great lectures, and great | Quizz | and assignment to help me learn | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good materials, matlab programs and quizzes and faculty members. This subject is key to understand the basics of neural networks | Very good materials, matlab programs and | Quizz | and faculty members. This subject is | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The best online course I have ever taken!! The Instructor Mr. Andrew teaches really great. I just love the way he teaches. The pace of the course is also good and not that hard to keep up. The assignments and quizzes are also simple and effective. One can learn a lot from this course. Thank you. :) | to keep up. The assignments and | Quizz | are also simple and effective. One | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent for the machine learning beginners. Courser prepares the surroundings for each topics before going into deep. Intermediate quiz and assignments for each covered topics are very good idea to check learned concepts with practical. Thanks a lot. | topics before going into deep. Intermediate | Quizz | and assignments for each covered topics | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Some of the most advanced learning taught in amazing simplicity and choice of real world examples to make learners understand the fundamentals. The quizzes were awesome and same were the assignments. | make learners understand the fundamentals. The | Quizz | were awesome and same were the | Positive | 0.79 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Exceptionally good course material, Prof Ng's good job, great quizzes and well-guided assignments. | material, Prof Ng's good job, great | Quizz | and well-guided assignments. | Positive | 0.87 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course, great teacher. very useful material, quizzes, assignments, review questions and intutions throughout the course | course, great teacher. very useful material, | Quizz | assignments, review questions and intutions throughout | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Awesome course, great quizes and programming exercises | Awesome course, great | Quizz | and programming exercises | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Professor Andrew is great, and about discussions Tom es another great guy, he was a big help for us, was an amazing course. Quizzes sometimes are a little bit tricky and if you understand very well the classes you can do easily the matlab challenges. | for us, was an amazing course. | Quizz | sometimes are a little bit tricky | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Thank you Prof Ng. Your course was very clear and well designed. The quizzes and the programming assignments were perfect to test my understanding of each lecture. It was very understandable even without a deep background in computer science and mathematics thanks to your ability to simplify complex concepts. | very clear and well designed. The | Quizz | and the programming assignments were perfect | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew explains things in a very clear way. Some of the quizes seems redundant, ie., ask very basic questions which can be answered with common sense w/o knowing the content, but all in all give good intro. I gained enough knowledge to challenge PhDs specializing in ML when we brainstorm stuff. | very clear way. Some of the | Quizz | seems redundant, ie. , ask very | Negative | -0.76 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course: rather slow-paced but quite in-depth, great pedagogy, various quizzes and little questions in the videos that maintain interest and rhythm throughout the course. The programming assignments are also very well built, allowing people to focus on the core aspects of machine learning by taking care of all the language-specific environment. | but quite in-depth, great pedagogy, various | Quizz | and little questions in the videos | Positive | 0.77 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is really informative. And we can learn a lot by solving the quizzes and assignments sincerely. | learn a lot by solving the | Quizz | and assignments sincerely. | Positive | 0.64 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are a number of issues with this course, and more generally Coursera. While the course does cover the material, it uses non-standard mathematical notation. This can be very confusing and seems as if it is purposefully so. There are several mathematical abstractions used that perhaps have a purpose in later machine learning applications but seem unnecessary here. Another issue is that the course assumes the use of Octave which is not available for Windows users apparently. It also allows the use of MatLab but the quiz questions are in Octave which means the quiz is not necessarily testing understanding of the course material as it is Octave. Generally, the opportunities for feedback to Coursera are highly limited. A colleague once took a course online (through another platform). Some of the course material was objectively wrong. However, there was no ability to submit feedback. I have the sense that this could easily happen with the Coursera material. It totally undercuts the apparent validity of the platform. | the use of MatLab but the | Quizz | questions are in Octave which means | Positive | 0.78 | 0.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | There are a number of issues with this course, and more generally Coursera. While the course does cover the material, it uses non-standard mathematical notation. This can be very confusing and seems as if it is purposefully so. There are several mathematical abstractions used that perhaps have a purpose in later machine learning applications but seem unnecessary here. Another issue is that the course assumes the use of Octave which is not available for Windows users apparently. It also allows the use of MatLab but the quiz questions are in Octave which means the quiz is not necessarily testing understanding of the course material as it is Octave. Generally, the opportunities for feedback to Coursera are highly limited. A colleague once took a course online (through another platform). Some of the course material was objectively wrong. However, there was no ability to submit feedback. I have the sense that this could easily happen with the Coursera material. It totally undercuts the apparent validity of the platform. | are in Octave which means the | Quizz | is not necessarily testing understanding of | Negative | -0.7 | 0.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very good course for beginners. This course has completed satisfied my initial requirements. Quizzes and exercises are very include and ofcourse Mr Andrew is perfect at what he does. | has completed satisfied my initial requirements. | Quizz | and exercises are very include and | Positive | 0.87 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I have seen other machine learning courses but it cannot get any simpler than this. Most of the other courses will directly dive you into complex formulas and theorems. But Mr. Andrew Ng made it so easy for me to understand the basic concepts with his real world examples that now I can apply them in my own projects with ease. The evaluation system is also pretty good with hands on assignments. The quizzes were a little bit tough at times, but they forced me to go back to the corresponding topic and review it so that my concepts become clear. The assignments were also realistic and at times challenging for people using Matlab or Octave for first time. Thank you very much for this course. I hope this will help a lot in my career as a researcher. | good with hands on assignments. The | Quizz | were a little bit tough at | Positive | 0.74 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course teaches the fundamentals of various machine learning algorithms. Andrew's teaching/coaching style is excellent as he explains even the hardest concepts in simple ways that everyone can understand. If you go through his class videos twice the subject materials will be very clear and you can pass the quiz easily. After taking this course, I am motivated to learn more about machine learning. | clear and you can pass the | Quizz | easily. After taking this course, I | Negative | -0.84 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very Good course. Good examples Excellent quiz and exercises Slides are also very clear and easy-understanding | Very Good course. Good examples Excellent | Quizz | and exercises Slides are also very | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The material is clearly presented and the quizes and homework assignments re-inforce the learning. This class left me hungry to learn more. | material is clearly presented and the | Quizz | and homework assignments re-inforce the learning. | Negative | -0.79 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The first course ever on the Coursera platform, it is a very clear and comprehensive introduction to machine learning, with awesome explanations by professor Andrew Ng and fun and useful quizzes and programming excercises that help assimilate and understand the material. I would give 5 stars if a final exam and final bigger programming project was included, to really help students master the concepts and apply them to tougher problems. But overall it is a really great course! Highly recommended! | Andrew Ng and fun and useful | Quizz | and programming excercises that help assimilate | Positive | 0.96 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | "All you need to know about Machine Learning but didn't know whom to ask". Wonderful course! The quizzes and exercises are very well put together. | to ask" . Wonderful course! The | Quizz | and exercises are very well put | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I am half way through this course and I feel this is the best online course available today. The content is superb, the subject is interesting and the instructor/the professor explains the topic in a very easy way. One more thing which makes this course great is the tools - the quizes and assignment framework (including the submission process) is very well designed. I aim to pursue career in Machine Learning at some point in time in (near) future. I am sure I am on right track. Anyone new to ML must start with this course. | great is the tools - the | Quizz | and assignment framework (including the submission | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | is not correspond with level of | Quizz | In lectures they are talking about | Negative | -0.68 | -0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | about simple stuff and then in | Quizz | they ask you about details they | Negative | -0.81 | -0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Level of difficulty of lectures is not correspond with level of quizzes. In lectures they are talking about simple stuff and then in quizzes they ask you about details they didn't mentioned. You could deducts this information though. But this is exactly the main problem with this course - for quizzes you should deduct and learn by yourself so much stuff, that videos start to be not worth your time. | problem with this course - for | Quizz | you should deduct and learn by | Negative | -0.94 | -0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was my first class on Coursera and I couldn't have been more happier about it. Content is very well presented, mathematics standing behind various ML models is served to the listener with just enough details to understand it, but not to add any confusion. Assignments are great and really help you to understand how algorithms works. The only thing I'd change is questions about Octave in Quizes. Octave is very nice tool, no doubt, but I personally want to stick to R language and I really didn't want to memorize certain functions or syntax that Octave is using. Great job! I can recommend this class to anyone with a clean conscious. | change is questions about Octave in | Quizz | Octave is very nice tool, no | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | good videos. reasonable quiz questions. good programming assignments. | good videos. reasonable | Quizz | questions. good programming assignments. | Negative | -0.64 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, better than any course I had at university; it's very well structured, Prof Ng is a perfect didact and the assignments and quizzes are well chosen and informative. I can just recommend to anyone, who is interested in machine learning, to enroll this course and enjoy it! | perfect didact and the assignments and | Quizz | are well chosen and informative. I | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is great course. The content is very focussed and is apt for professionals who wants a quick peek into the fundamentals but mostly focus on application of the theory. The delivery is awesome. The quizzes, assignments are very helpful. I ended up learning a very deep and complex subject with much ease. Kudos to the professor for making it look so simple. | theory. The delivery is awesome. The | Quizz | assignments are very helpful. I ended | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The lectures are great, and they are reinforced with the quizzes and programming exercises. The quizzes need critical thinking to get all of them correctly. The programming assignments are there to cover the basic concepts. The way the course it taught is suited for online courses. The topics are well-divided in short chunks, making it easier to watch the lectures at different times of the day. There are some mistakes on the English subtitles, but it doesn't hinder the learning. Overall, a well-taught course. | the quizzes and programming exercises. The | Quizz | need critical thinking to get all | Negative | -0.63 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Lots of things to learn. Quizzes and assignments are really great. | Lots of things to learn. | Quizz | and assignments are really great. | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course offers informative lectures with good explanations, a set of quizzes with well-posed questions and even programming exercises that are evaluated online using Octave. Highly recommended! | with good explanations, a set of | Quizz | with well-posed questions and even programming | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course provides an excellent overview of the Machine learning . However, the programming assignments are quite basic once OCTAVE/MATLAB is well understood. The quizzes are interesting. Could include a capstone project with guidance. | once OCTAVE/MATLAB is well understood. The | Quizz | are interesting. Could include a capstone | Positive | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great class, wonderfully taught! Complex topics have been explained very well for anyone to understand. Perfect if you want to get into developing Machine Learning applications on your own or if you just want to know more about them. The quizzes and programming assignments provided great opportunities to try out and better understand the topics covered in the lecture videos. Would definitely recommend! | to know more about them. The | Quizz | and programming assignments provided great opportunities | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course that holds one's hand through the field of ML and provides a hands on guide through the in-video questions, quizes & assignment tutorials. A great confidence builder. | on guide through the in-video questions, | Quizz | & assignment tutorials. A great confidence | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is pretty fast paced as well in depth course on Machine Learning. First five weeks are hard and mainly focused on building foundation while rest of the weeks teaches very useful technique to broaden the knowledge. Professor Ng has done awesome job as well as all the mentors. There is so much information on the group discussion, I hardly had to post anything as most of the answers to my questions are already there. wiki page is great and I did read it before taking any quiz. Some quizzes are super hard and I had to attempt few times to pass those. | did read it before taking any | Quizz | Some quizzes are super hard and | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | It is pretty fast paced as well in depth course on Machine Learning. First five weeks are hard and mainly focused on building foundation while rest of the weeks teaches very useful technique to broaden the knowledge. Professor Ng has done awesome job as well as all the mentors. There is so much information on the group discussion, I hardly had to post anything as most of the answers to my questions are already there. wiki page is great and I did read it before taking any quiz. Some quizzes are super hard and I had to attempt few times to pass those. | it before taking any quiz. Some | Quizz | are super hard and I had | Negative | -0.72 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent Course and Well detailed lectures. For a beginner in Machine learning, i am able to understand the concepts clearly. Quiz and Assignments are really good and interesting. I am hoping to complete this certification by new year | able to understand the concepts clearly. | Quizz | and Assignments are really good and | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | At the beginning, I thought it would be hard for a starter in ML; however, during the process, I found the course setting is easy to follow, especially the quiz, which help me master the key point of each class. And the programming exercises give me the intuition in applying each individual ML skills. I think the course settings are convenient and practical. So after finishing the course, I have excuse to recommend other ML beginners to join the course, which will help to build a skeleton of the knowledge about the concept, algorithm, and skills in ML. AND thank Andrew and Coursera for giving such an practical guidance. The suggestion at last what I want to append is providing some further courses or future direction after this course. However, maybe I can get them from the course forum. | is easy to follow, especially the | Quizz | which help me master the key | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I believe this is the most enjoyable nine weeks course that I ever had. Prof. Andrew has his way explaining a complex mathematical concept in an easy and non-intimidating way. I used to be afraid & dislike when it comes to statistics, machine learning related field. After following this course, I've gained a bit more courage to learn more complex and exciting field. The Quiz and programming works are challenging but enjoyable to do. It gives me more understanding about the topic while having fun applying the concept to real problems in my field of work. The course itself is really interesting and relevant if you are in the software engineering field. There are a lot of concepts that you can apply to your work. I highly recommended to follow the course and do the assignment. | more complex and exciting field. The | Quizz | and programming works are challenging but | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The course provides a sizeable amount of pretty cohesive material, which can still be understood by non-CS students. It's very practical and it includes a very nice mix of quiz tests and great MATLAB/Octave programming assignments. After going through the assignments I started wondering about other problems which data sets I can plug with small modifications into the completed solutions. Andrew Ng keeps a great balance between explaining important details and skipping over parts that require straying too much from the main topic of the lecture. I still don't have very deep or broad knowledge in the Machine Learning domain, but it feels like the course doesn't miss anything of the fundamentals. Overall, I'd definitely recommend the course to CS students, high-school students with interests in the computer science area and even specialists in other areas with some knowledge in linear algebra with interest in the AI and ML domains. | includes a very nice mix of | Quizz | tests and great MATLAB/Octave programming assignments. | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is how an online course should be! Quizzes, Programming assignments, Questions change when you retake quizzes! Would've been better if a reference textbook was suggested that one can grasp more information from. I couldn't rate the course below 5 though. Recommended! | assignments, Questions change when you retake | Quizz | Would've been better if a reference | Negative | -1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course, the teacher did a very good job explaining a very difficult subject to a group of students with signifficantly different backgrounds. The quizzes were easy to solve once you took the time to see all the related videos. There was a little bit of handholding in the programming assignmentes, but that may be due to the aforementioned backgrounds the student came up with. I'm a spanish speaking mechanical engineer with just a programming hobby and I was able to finish with a 99% grade. If I could do it, anyone can | students with signifficantly different backgrounds. The | Quizz | were easy to solve once you | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This is a very good introduction to machine learning. It covers a very broad set of material, and the lectures are very clear. The quizzes and programming assignments are based directly on the course material, making it easy to complete the assignments if you understand the lecture material (in contrast with some other courses I have taken where the assignments require lots of extra material not taught in the course). It is very helpful to have some programming experience, and some knowledge of linear algebra, probability, and calculus. The course is very topical, so it does not go very deep into the material, but it does offer some practical advice for using machine learning algorithms in daily applications. | the lectures are very clear. The | Quizz | and programming assignments are based directly | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I like the way this course is designed. The lectures are very articulate. The thing that impressed me most about the Professor is; Students who doesn't have sound calculus and vector algebra understanding also can complete this course easily. Assignments are application oriented and some are challenging too. The Questions in Quiz assignments are in such a way that they test your understanding of that particular lecture and the summary of it. | are challenging too. The Questions in | Quizz | assignments are in such a way | Positive | 0.62 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Concepts are explained clearly and without getting distracted by too much math. The quizzes and assignments are useful too. | distracted by too much math. The | Quizz | and assignments are useful too. | Negative | -0.65 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Lots of great condensed content. I miss a written summary of the videos though. Furthermore, the quality of sound is awful. Well designed quizzes and assignments. Good: In-video quizzes. | of sound is awful. Well designed | Quizz | and assignments. Good: In-video quizzes. | Negative | -0.99 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very well designed course covering all the topics on the subject. The quizzes and matlab exercises ensure that you know and understand the details of each step. Full of practical suggestions during implementation and provides a guided approach to check/improve your model. | the topics on the subject. The | Quizz | and matlab exercises ensure that you | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | An extremely useful course designed very beautifully and presented in a very lucid manner. The assignments help in bringing out the technicalities of the course very efficiently. And the quiz questions help a lot in gaining intuition. However, it MUST have a sequel.. another course that takes students deeper into Machine Learning concepts and tools of the trade. | the course very efficiently. And the | Quizz | questions help a lot in gaining | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great professor and teaching style, the quiz helps to understand the fundamental concepts, and coding projects also provide hands-on experience and knowledge to gain deeper learning of this subject. | Great professor and teaching style, the | Quizz | helps to understand the fundamental concepts, | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The programming exercises aren't really all that challenging...just implement the formulas provided in the course or in the assignment itself, and you're mostly done. I hate the questions on the quizzes that are "Select all the following that are true..." The only questions I ever got wrong on quizzes were of that sort. | I hate the questions on the | Quizz | that are " Select all the | Negative | -0.83 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The programming exercises aren't really all that challenging...just implement the formulas provided in the course or in the assignment itself, and you're mostly done. I hate the questions on the quizzes that are "Select all the following that are true..." The only questions I ever got wrong on quizzes were of that sort. | questions I ever got wrong on | Quizz | were of that sort. | Negative | -0.94 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is simply amazing, all the content from the video lessons, through the quizzes and the programming exercises are really well done, and also, there are really good mentors helping on the Discussion areas. If one with the will to really dive into these complex things to extract knowledge, I assure you, you will. The course is well made, but doesn't mean it's easy. I questioned myself through a lot of times in the beginning if I really was capable of learning all of this stuff. But I didn't give up, and well, this might be one of the most important decisions I've made in my life. This course aroused in me the passion to carry this knowledge, and keep improving it through my career. | from the video lessons, through the | Quizz | and the programming exercises are really | Negative | -0.68 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent place to begin learning on machine learning. The course's quizzes as well as coding exercise are challenging enough to keep oneself going. It covers a variety of topics with an amazing lucidness and depth. I really enjoyed the course. | learning on machine learning. The course's | Quizz | as well as coding exercise are | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Really great course. The lectures were instructive and detailed without wasting time. The quizes tested well that you understood the material, and the assignments made you learn not just how to do machine learning but how to do it well and intelligently. I can't imagine a better way to learn Machine Learning than with this course. The only potential negative is that those of us like me who started this course being terrible at matlab/octave have to become competent in it to succeed. I highly recommend this course to anybody who wants to learn Machine Learning. There isn't a better resource out there. | and detailed without wasting time. The | Quizz | tested well that you understood the | Negative | -0.83 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course was very nicely done. Dr Ng's videos and narrative were excellent. They were long enough to convey the material properly and short enough not to loose my attention. Assignments were very good as they left you just enough room to fail, learn and ultimately succeed. The quizzes were thought provoking. On the questions that stated "choose all that apply," I would suggest that some form of feedback be provided so that the test taker could know which ones were incorrectly selected/not selected. Perhaps partial credit would be good instead of 0/20 with one wrong selection. Feedback, perhaps an explanation, would be appropriate on all questions incorrectly answered. I would also suggest a pdf document that showed how to do the various matrix operations in octave with an example or two. This would include basic and advanced operations. I know linear algebra, I just didn't know the syntax in octave and this cost me 3-5 hours over the whole course. Now off to do some simple applications here at work like spam filter and anomaly detection to start. Thanks for an excellent course. | fail, learn and ultimately succeed. The | Quizz | were thought provoking. On the questions | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Amazing course! Content is easy to follow. Material that seems daunting on first inspection is dissected and presented in a very intuitive way. The quizzes and especially the Octave/Matlab practice problems are extremely helpful to check your understanding. The scripts are organized very clearly and provides insight on how all the modelling steps should be structured. Mentors for the course are exceptionally helpful. I cannot think of a single criticism. It is hard for me to imagine anyone who is interested in machine learning and is new to the subject walking away disappointed. Thank you Andrew Ng! | in a very intuitive way. The | Quizz | and especially the Octave/Matlab practice problems | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Great course for a beginner in Machine Learning. Nice explanation of concepts with good examples followed by programming assignments. I like the way of using an intuition to understand a new learning theory. Questions in quizzes will help check/improve basic concept of the learning algorithms with real world problems. | a new learning theory. Questions in | Quizz | will help check/improve basic concept of | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I liked this course very much: The lectures follow up in a logical, natural way and the topics are very well explained. Personally, I had more problems with the quizzes (5 questions each) than with the programming assignments. The examples were interesting and the instructions so clear and detailed that I found it rather easy to do the programming. Another point that is worth to mention: The instructor, Andrew Ng, has not only an agreeable voice and speaks an easy-to-understand english (important for me as a non-english speaker) - He "transports" in addition his own passion for the subject and gives a lot of applicable advices. | I had more problems with the | Quizz | (5 questions each) than with the | Negative | -0.8 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course for getting started on machine learning. Answers and explanations of the quiz after it has been answered would have been a little more helpful. All in all an awesome course! :) | learning. Answers and explanations of the | Quizz | after it has been answered would | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Andrew Ng is an excellent tutor and has a real talent for exposition. I find I'm getting the depth, rigor and keen interest that this subject commands, but not at the expense of clarity. I also find the quizzes to be conducive to my learning. In a modest number of questions, the most important points are covered completely. | of clarity. I also find the | Quizz | to be conducive to my learning. | Positive | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent explanations in the video lecture, quizzes that test your understanding of the course material and programming assignments to see how you can actually apply what you've learned. Great course! | Excellent explanations in the video lecture, | Quizz | that test your understanding of the | Positive | 0.89 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very interesting content, very well explained. Minor issues: some quizzes or questions appear a little early sometimes regarding the order of the videos though, and subtitles are not always correct. | very well explained. Minor issues: some | Quizz | or questions appear a little early | Positive | 0.89 | 0.5 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I really enjoyed learning this course! All the course material, including the slides, quizzes, programming problem descriptions, are so well prepared. I like those subtle animations used in those examples in the teaching slides. They just simply help! | the course material, including the slides, | Quizz | programming problem descriptions, are so well | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is absolute garbage. You get no feedback on your quizzes or assignments and the professor is one of the most boring I've ever seen. It's absurdly frustrating to repeatedly fail without any feedback as to why you're failing. The lectures are clearly from a math perspective, as the prof simply draws what he's talking about on the slides. His hand writing is poor, and he does a lackluster job of explaining what exactly he's doing. Finally, pure lecture with no notes is almost impossible to learn, as there's nothing to read and study. I'd rate this course a 1/10, take the course on iTunes from Caltech instead. | You get no feedback on your | Quizz | or assignments and the professor is | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Excellent course. Contents, videos, quizzes and programming exercises are very well contrived and conducted. I learnt a lot. | Excellent course. Contents, videos, | Quizz | and programming exercises are very well | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The best Machine learning course ever. Provides intuition to every concept in this course. Prof. Andrew Ng makes things easier for beginners. Best lectures with fine balance of quiz and assignments. Thanks to Stanford University and prof. Andrew Ng. | Best lectures with fine balance of | Quizz | and assignments. Thanks to Stanford University | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | One of the best course I did with Coursera. Everything is just perfect : video, quiz and programming examples. | Everything is just perfect : video, | Quizz | and programming examples. | Positive | 0.79 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | The subject of the course concerns how to estimate parameters to make predictions about data and to classify data. The lectures are very clear and the examples are well chosen. The mentor, Tom Mosher, is also diligent, clear, and patient. In addition to the subject matter itself, it is interesting to learn that these are some of the key methods used in Silicon Valley. If you have a strong mathematical background, some of the early lectures are too slow. (On the flip side, for someone with less background, the course is self-contained.) However, by about lecture 3, I was glad I stuck with it. Instructors might consider adding some no-credit quizzes to help people "place out" of certain videos. If you can get past the assignment on backprojection for neural networks, you're home free! | Instructors might consider adding some no-credit | Quizz | to help people " place out" | Negative | -0.72 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | if we have understood the concepts), | Quizz | and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents | Positive | 0.68 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Before starting this course, I had no previous knowledge of machine learning and I had never programmed in Octave and I have little/no programming skills. This is a 11-week course and so I was not sure if I would make it to the end (or even get through the first week) but I was keen to learn something new. Positive Aspects: The course is extremely well structured, with short videos (and test questions to help us verify if we have understood the concepts), quizzes and assignments. Prof. Andrew Ng presents the concepts (some very difficult) in a clear and almost intuitive manner without going too much into detail with mathematical proofs, making the course accessible to anyone. The mentors were fantastic and provided prompt responses, links to tutorials and test cases, which all helped me get through the course. Negative Aspects: Searching the Discussion Board for something specific was no easy task. I would have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions in the quizzes that I got wrong. What I loved about this course: Learning how powerful vectorization is, it allows us to write several lines of code in one single line and can be much faster than using for-loops. I was wowed several times. Prof. Andrew Ng is a great teacher. He is also extremely humble and very encouraging. During the course he often said, "It's ok if you don't understand this completely now. It also took me time to figure this out." This helped me a lot. He also said, "if you got through the assignments, you should consider yourself an expert!" and I laughed silly. By no means do I feel like an expert but now I have a basic understanding of the different types of learning algorithms, what they could be used for and more importantly this course has generated a spark in me to use this tool for things that I find interesting and for that I am very grateful. I don't think a teacher has ever thanked me for assisting a class. This is a first-time! So thank you Prof. Andrew Ng and everyone who worked to put this course together. Also, special thanks to Tom Mosher (mentor). My best MOOC so far! | some of the questions in the | Quizz | that I got wrong. What I | Negative | -0.63 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This was by far the best class I have had so far on Coursera. I feel that I now have a really good understanding of linear and logistic regression and neural networks as well as the other learning methods that we touched upon. I thought that the quizzes and assignments were very appropriate and helped me to further cement my understanding that I gained through watching the video. Professor Ang explains the material very clearly. I always walked away feeling that any questions I might have were answered completely in the videos or in the discussions. I would highly recommend this class to anyone who wants to have a good understanding of Machine Learning. | touched upon. I thought that the | Quizz | and assignments were very appropriate and | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | I would say this is the best coarse on machine learning for the beginners. Sir Andrew Ng, he's the best teacher I have I ever seen. The way he shaped the lectures, quizes and assignments is really matchless. Its free of cost above all. If someone wanna be expert at machine learning but he has no background knowledge, taking this coarse is the best way to get started. | The way he shaped the lectures, | Quizz | and assignments is really matchless. Its | Positive | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course is very instructive and detailed, easy to follow with enough quizes and programming assignments. The support in the discussions forum is excelent | detailed, easy to follow with enough | Quizz | and programming assignments. The support in | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | detailed explanation and the quizzes are good practice to strengthen the memory. | detailed explanation and the | Quizz | are good practice to strengthen the | Negative | -0.68 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | A fantastic course. The content is informative and clearly outlined by the professor in the excellent set of video lectures. The quizzes and weekly projects are also an excellent learning tool. I greatly enjoyed this course and learned a lot that I will use in my career moving forward. Highly recommended. | excellent set of video lectures. The | Quizz | and weekly projects are also an | Positive | 0.89 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This class is excellent on its own, but I'm taking it after having taken the 9-course sequence on Data Science from Johns Hopkins, which gave me a good foundation upon which to better understand this deeper dive into Machine Learning than what is presented in the 4-week course from JH on the same topic. Andrew Ng is presenting the material beautifully and understandably. The quizzes and the exercises complement the class lecture material quite well and both help cement the concepts presented. | the material beautifully and understandably. The | Quizz | and the exercises complement the class | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | This course gives great insights into the internals of machine learning. I recommend this course to any one who wants to secure a future in machine learning. Andrew Ng is a great instructor and the quizes and assignments are thought provoking. Learning a tool such as R can help you do the stuff, but knowing the internals can help you do the stuff better. | is a great instructor and the | Quizz | and assignments are thought provoking. Learning | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| Gtv4Xb1-EeS-ViIACwYKVQ | Very well put together course. The lectures are logically structured and well presented with lots of meaningful and current examples. The Matlab programming assignments have been well thought out to incrementally step the student up through the different capabilities. 'Select All that Apply' quiz questions will likely drive you crazy as there is no feedback on no feedback on failed questions to understand where your mistake(s) was/were which means you spend hours more pouring over the videos/notes to try and better understand possible options for a subsequent attempt. | different capabilities. 'Select All that Apply' | Quizz | questions will likely drive you crazy | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.74 | 1.25 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Unlike the rest of the modules in this specialisation, this one was well taught, a good blend of theory and practice and well paced. There were still a few issues with wording in quizzes (and some where there seemed to be two identical answers to one question, where one would be considered right and the other wrong - purely chance). In addition, the lack of consistency in how to submit assignments across the specialisation is frustrating, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a way to show how to use github or something like that, but it shouldn't be the case. | a few issues with wording in | Quizz | (and some where there seemed to | Negative | -0.74 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | It's very cookbook driven - it's not a deep dive into the topics. This can be dangerous: a little knowledge and all that. However references for more are provided. If you can imitate the coding examples, you should be OK for the assignments. Fair warning: the quizzes are hard to replicate unless you set up your environment to mirror exactly the version of the packages used in the course. | for the assignments. Fair warning: the | Quizz | are hard to replicate unless you | Negative | -0.98 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I learned a lot in this class. There are slight gaps from the depth of material covered in the lectures to the quizzes and assignment. If you're good at researching online, you'll be fine. | covered in the lectures to the | Quizz | and assignment. If you're good at | Negative | -0.64 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Very little depth. I don't recommend this if you don't already have background in statistics or R. I really didn't learn anything. I mostly just gamed the quizzes and projects. | anything. I mostly just gamed the | Quizz | and projects. | Negative | -0.7 | -1.0 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The quizes do not match a 100% with the lecture videos. There are some weird questions. My algorithms' outputs deviate from answers some times, which is due to different software versions. Quizes are not very educating this time. Courses by Brian Caffo were much better. | The | Quizz | do not match a 100% with | Negative | -0.78 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Had big expectations for this one... really one of the ones to look forward to after working through the beginning of the specialization, but for some reason, it seemed any prof or even TA interaction was absent this time around like in none of the other specialization coursed to date. Bugs in the new interface and quizzes weren't really addressed. Couldn't even get an official response about the apparent removal of Distinction-level now (which I'd been working to get in all specialization courses and now seems no longer an option). Still interesting content. As a "free" course, it's still really valuable. As one of the people that paid for this and all others in this specialization, this is the one I felt didn't return as much value to justify the payment with no "official" course staff seeming to be involved this round. | Bugs in the new interface and | Quizz | weren't really addressed. Couldn't even get | Negative | -0.99 | -0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | " data scientist? " 2. The | Quizz | I think these items are good | Negative | -0.75 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thank you for inviting me to be a beta tester for Practical Machine Learning. I completed this course at the beginning of October of this year. When I was asked to be a "beta tester" I thought that I would be presented with new materials. However, the only thing that has changed is the look and layout of the Coursera web pages. The video lectures, quizzes, and assignment are the same as they have been for quite some time. Here are some specific comments: 1. The video lectures: To me, these are clear and easy to follow. However, like those in the other courses in the Data Science Specialization, this course covers a wide range of subjects but tends not to have much depth. When I compare this and other courses in the specialization to other moocs that I have taken including Machine Learning with Andrew Ng and the Stanford Online EdX Course Statistical Learning with Trevor Hastie and Rob Tibshirani, the somewhat cursory treatment of the topics in the Data Science Specialization becomes more noticeable. Perhaps in the interest of "truth in advertising" this course should be called "A Brief Introduction to Practical Machine Learning." In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an MS and PhD in psychology with a quantitative bent. I have had lots of statistics courses, especially those related to ANOVA, MANOVA, nonparametric statistics, correlation and regression methods, and structural equation modeling. The latter is important in psychology because researchers in this field like to measure latent variables. I had been an analyst using SPSS for several decades and the courses in this specialization helped me to migrate to R. Also, there have been may new developments that have become more accessible through R packages (like the fancier tree methods) that were not available when I completed my PhD. Thus these courses (and others such as the ones by Ng and Hastie and Tibshirani) have helped me to keep abreast of these developments. So they are good for me, but I wonder to what degree do the courses in the Data Science Specialization actually make a person a "data scientist?" 2. The quizzes: I think these items are good practice and are at a reasonable level of difficulty. However, these items are the same ones that you have been giving for quite some time, with perhaps a few new ones added. A little googling will lead you to the answers to these quizzes posted online. I recommend that you put a little time and effort into writing all new items. 3. The final project: Again, this project is good practice and seems to be at a reasonable level of difficulty. And again, this is the same project that appears to have been given at the end of numerous iterations of this course. And again, numerous write-ups for this project can be found online. And again, I would recommend that you put a little time and effort into finding a new data set for people to analyze. This would help minimize some of the rampant cheating that I found in this and in other classes in the specialization. On the subject of cheating, when I was doing the peer grading for the courses in the Specialization, I would enter the code of the students that I was grading into the Google search box and all too often I found links to submissions for the project by students who had taken earlier sessions of the class. That is, students were copying these earlier submissions by other students and submitting them as their own. And I don't mean that they were similar: students were copying other people's work line by line, character by character. I found that to be quite irritating and I always reported it to Coursera. Of course, if the instructors would change their assignments once I a while, then this sort of copying would be impossible. As it is, it appears that the good professors put a lot of time and effort into creating what are indeed a worthwhile set of classes. However, after they created the classes, they seem to have pushed the "autopilot" button and gone off to do their day jobs. I would suggest that re-engaging with these courses and reading some of the comments that other students have made would be helpful. Overall, I appreciate the courses in the Data Science Specialization and specifically this course. I know that these class materials took considerable time and efforts to create. I wish the instructors continued success with these classes. | you to the answers to these | Quizz | posted online. I recommend that you | Positive | 0.92 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H02KsW1DEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | A good introductory course for people who has an interest in knowing the principles of machine learning and want to make a step forward. Sufficient details covered throughout the course and additional resources were provided which are very useful. Quizzes were well designed with minor improvements in the accidental mismatch of the answers due to package version issues. Overall the study experience was enjoyable and would definitely recommend to someone who wants to start knowing data science. | were provided which are very useful. | Quizz | were well designed with minor improvements | Positive | 0.89 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.97 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | Varied and well-explained that held my interest throughout. My only criticism is the English in some of the written quizzes, especially in the final exam, needs reviewing by native speaker as some of the answers are ambiguous when they do not properly explain the context of the situation. | English in some of the written | Quizz | especially in the final exam, needs | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.97 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | It was a great course, however some of the quiz answers are debatable | great course, however some of the | Quizz | answers are debatable | Positive | 0.88 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.97 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | While the course was overall well developed, there are certain language challenges to overcome especially with understanding the wording of quizzes. I got a number of questions wrong simply because I could not understand the phrasing, and lack of explanations on quizzes makes for a lot of difficulty to evaluate progress. And I get the reason for not including answer explanations, at the same time I'm literally comparing answers to the module transcripts and could not possibly infer multiple choice answers based off how the topic was explained. I would suggest more definitive questions and reduce multiple choice questions or at least define the question in a more narrow, specified manner to minimize confusion. I'm taking this course for fun, I have an MBA and love strategy, so the topics are not new by any means, but if I can't understand what you're trying to say I would imagine non-business backgrounds would find the questions very difficult. | especially with understanding the wording of | Quizz | I got a number of questions | Positive | 0.85 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.97 |
| H3HGeBK4EeS0RyIACp5OCg | While the course was overall well developed, there are certain language challenges to overcome especially with understanding the wording of quizzes. I got a number of questions wrong simply because I could not understand the phrasing, and lack of explanations on quizzes makes for a lot of difficulty to evaluate progress. And I get the reason for not including answer explanations, at the same time I'm literally comparing answers to the module transcripts and could not possibly infer multiple choice answers based off how the topic was explained. I would suggest more definitive questions and reduce multiple choice questions or at least define the question in a more narrow, specified manner to minimize confusion. I'm taking this course for fun, I have an MBA and love strategy, so the topics are not new by any means, but if I can't understand what you're trying to say I would imagine non-business backgrounds would find the questions very difficult. | phrasing, and lack of explanations on | Quizz | makes for a lot of difficulty | Negative | -0.72 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.97 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | So far so good! I like the way the lectures and quizzes are presented. I am loving the instructor and his style. However, I have to go through the whole course before I could say how productive the course will be. Anyway, thanks a lot for the team! Thanks a lot Nick Sanots, Coursera, UC Davis and all fellow learners. I was a week late and could not complete the final assignment in time. However, the course is great! The course is medium paced, and best even for newcomers and intermediates alike. The chapters presented in the course are very productive and vivid. I simply love the course. I don't feel there is any room for improvement. Its just perfect! I love this course. Looking forward for next session of this course and next course. | like the way the lectures and | Quizz | are presented. I am loving the | Positive | 0.67 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.22 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I am an Architect-Planner by profession. Was looking for this course for quite sometime. I finally found it on Coursera. I had a great time learning Fundamentals of GIS. I had never before worked in Gis though I had a very little theoretical idea. But, at the end of this course, I was able to analyse and make my own map, something I had never done before with GIS. The lectures were to the point, with most of the details covered. The assignments for practice were very helpful too. This course comes with a very helpful reading materiaI and a year long licensed version of ArcGIS too. I had a great time in taking up the quizes, and the peer reviewed final assignment. I highly recommend this course. Last but not the least, thank you Nick Santos for teaching so well! got back to class almost after 8 years and had a great time! I am sure that this will help me taking up further studies in my field. | great time in taking up the | Quizz | and the peer reviewed final assignment. | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.22 |
| hESqA3EhEeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | Thank you Nick! Yes I watched all your lectures and did all the quizzes and the assignments just for fun :) | your lectures and did all the | Quizz | and the assignments just for fun | Negative | -0.84 | 1.0 | 0.73 | 1.22 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Nice introduction. I wasn't following the lectures that close, because the material was not that new to me, but the assignments and quizzes are amazing | to me, but the assignments and | Quizz | are amazing | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It's an incredible course with detail explanations and interactive quizzes. | course with detail explanations and interactive | Quizz | | Positive | 0.72 | 0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Good class, easy if you've already studied the subject before. But, it does provide you a simple way to get started on some projects. Could use some proofreading on some of it's quizzes (possibly the British English influencing the syntax of the written language). | some proofreading on some of it's | Quizz | (possibly the British English influencing the | Positive | 0.66 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Suitable neither for absolute beginners nor as a stand-alone course. For example, there are things that the quiz questions refer to that haven't been covered in the course, but you can't even look them up because they haven't given you the necessary terminology to find relevant information about them on google. This means that you'll be left looking through a minefield of resources that include the code in the quiz question but are actually about something else. I have now started using Lynda instead, and am seeing all the bad habits I've picked up and the holes left in my knowledge. Normally I prefer Lynda to Coursera for the assignments and the quizzes, but not in this case... | that include the code in the | Quizz | question but are actually about something | Negative | -0.65 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Suitable neither for absolute beginners nor as a stand-alone course. For example, there are things that the quiz questions refer to that haven't been covered in the course, but you can't even look them up because they haven't given you the necessary terminology to find relevant information about them on google. This means that you'll be left looking through a minefield of resources that include the code in the quiz question but are actually about something else. I have now started using Lynda instead, and am seeing all the bad habits I've picked up and the holes left in my knowledge. Normally I prefer Lynda to Coursera for the assignments and the quizzes, but not in this case... | Coursera for the assignments and the | Quizz | but not in this case. . | Negative | -0.89 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | I think it the course goes extremely fast, I do not agree with its tittle of basic nor the instructors provide sufficient information to achieve the final quiz goal, I am not sure about completing the entire course. Thanks anyway. | sufficient information to achieve the final | Quizz | goal, I am not sure about | Negative | -0.65 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Very good start to front-end programming. The instructors engaged the audience well and explained the concepts clearly and in detail. There was a exponental jump between week 3 lectures and week 3 quiz. I had to do much additional research on the web to pass that. | week 3 lectures and week 3 | Quizz | I had to do much additional | Negative | -0.9 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Bright instructors delivering succinct and interesting content, with quick-paced videos and quizzes make a great learning experience. I am really impressed! Thank you, University of London people! | interesting content, with quick-paced videos and | Quizz | make a great learning experience. I | Positive | 0.79 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The instructors are very knowledgeable, but the course seems to have the , "we just threw this together at the last minute feel". Many of the Quizzes are very poorly worded. The final project is a bit of a disaster as some of the reviewers are unable to unzip a generic '.gz' file and you can end up getting 0 points from those particular incompetent types. | minute feel" . Many of the | Quizz | are very poorly worded. The final | Negative | -0.87 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Everything is so clear and well structured, and activities and quizzes are well designed. I really enjoy watching the videos. Thanks for a great course! | and well structured, and activities and | Quizz | are well designed. I really enjoy | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | other than the quiz.. everything else was good.. quiz was not challenging enough.. | other than the | Quizz | . everything else was good. . | Negative | -0.97 | 0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | other than the quiz.. everything else was good.. quiz was not challenging enough.. | . everything else was good. . | Quizz | was not challenging enough. . | Negative | -0.91 | 0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | All three parts (html css and javascript) covered by this course are well taught. It is targets beginners very well. I especially like the way how javascript is introduced -- in contrast to normal programming language courses which start with grammar, here it starts with examples. This way one can very fast already start programming something, which is much more interesting. Also the quizzes, exercises and projects are well thought through and help a lot with understanding and learning. Finally, about the examples used in this course, many of them are simple and nice, but some of them are maybe too simple to convey the message, such that it doesn't help much with understanding... | is much more interesting. Also the | Quizz | exercises and projects are well thought | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This was a fantastic course! I really enjoyed the quizes after every video. It helped me stay focused during videos and provided a good mental break at times. | fantastic course! I really enjoyed the | Quizz | after every video. It helped me | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | many question in the quiz wasn't covered in the video lectures. I enrolled in this course looking for refreshing my info about the 3 subjects and hopefully gaining new in-depth info about them but the information presented during the course was very trivial and only covered few parts about the main 3 subjects | many question in the | Quizz | wasn't covered in the video lectures. | Negative | -0.81 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course needs an overhaul. There are mistakes in some code examples and quiz questions are sometimes ambiguous. While I appreciate the work that has gone into making this MOOC, there are better courses available on Coursera to learn this material. | mistakes in some code examples and | Quizz | questions are sometimes ambiguous. While I | Positive | 0.76 | -0.5 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| HITLfhnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Great class. Challenging and exciting. Great explanations, knowledgeable professors, high quality videos and challenging quizzes that force you to really understand the covered material. | professors, high quality videos and challenging | Quizz | that force you to really understand | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 1.08 | 1.13 |
| hmUA37FKEeS5liIACye34Q | I really enjoyed this course. It was full of resources, analysis, and history that together fueled my interest in international public health. I was especially grateful for Dr Perry's personal insights - taken from his longstanding work in public health around the world. I had to prep for the quizzes - they weren't easy and I had to put in time on my papers but my return on investment has been great. I'm very glad I took the course and I just signed up for my next public health Johns Hopkins U course through Coursera. | I had to prep for the | Quizz | - they weren't easy and I | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 1.02 | 1.05 |
| hmUA37FKEeS5liIACye34Q | I thinks it only happens to me. I found things are a little unorganized for me who doesn't speak English as mother tongue. But the videos and quizzes help me a lot to understand. | mother tongue. But the videos and | Quizz | help me a lot to understand. | Positive | 0.82 | 0.0 | 1.02 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Lecture videos are good. Assessment of knowledge (quizzes) are weak. | videos are good. Assessment of knowledge | Quizz | are weak. | Positive | 0.69 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The teacher is very passionate; therefore I enjoyed the topics that were taught very differently than when I took AP Calculus AB in high school. The answer input sections for the tests and quizzes were rather frustrating because I had to type very specific keys on the keyboard just to input a constant or a polynomial. And one typo caused me to fail some assignments. Also the decimal approximations were very specific to the point where if I didn't type an extra number in the tenths, hundredths, or thousandths place then I would get the answer wrong even if I did the problem correctly. | input sections for the tests and | Quizz | were rather frustrating because I had | Negative | -0.79 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | problem with the course is the | Quizz | CPU. It does not recognize correct | Negative | -0.75 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | on the same questions in earlier | Quizz | So take the coruse - enjoy | Positive | 0.67 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | problem with this course is the | Quizz | On several occasions I have submitted | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | They could not understand why the | Quizz | were returned that way. On certain | Negative | -0.74 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have finished this course and moved on to the 2nd part. In sum, the course was excellent and Professor Fowler is terrific at explaining concepts both visually and algebraically. He provides both rigorous and intuitive explanations. I learned a lot and firmed up many concepts. i really appreciated the balance between visual and numerical. The real problem with the course is the quiz CPU. It does not recognize correct answers even when those answers are exactly the same as the ones provided by way of correcting your "wrong" answer. There is something really wrong with the quiz review code. That can be a "downer" when you are seeking a little encouragement after some hard work - and you know your answers are correct - and In Fact have been correct on the same questions in earlier quizzes. So take the coruse - enjoy the learning - but don't be discouraged because Coursera writes Kludgey code. IThe course is not yet over but perhaps someone will see this and make some changes. The professor is clear and enthusiastic. The main problem with this course is the quizzes. On several occasions I have submitted answers that were completely correct, only to find them all graded incorrect. I know they were correct because I had mathematician friends check them after receiving the failing grades. They could not understand why the quizzes were returned that way. On certain occasions, questions on one quiz were graded correct - and then the exact same type of question on another quiz was graded incorrect. In some cases, my answers were exactly the same as those probided by way of demonstrating the correct responses. Identical - yet marked wrong. When there are several ways to formulate an answer, we have no way of knowing what form is required. On a recent quiz, it turned out the answers were required in raw form - not solved to their numeric conclusion. But how are we to know that? I will write more at the end of the course. It is a good course for learning - but don't get upset if you get a bad grade. It is probably not an accurate reflection of your work. A final point - Professor Fowler should learn to pronounce "integral." It is NOT "intregal." It is "integral." He is, after all, a mathematician. You would not want a surgeon to speak of "cradiac care," would you? Otherwise - terrific class. | form is required. On a recent | Quizz | it turned out the answers were | Positive | 0.68 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Course seems fundamentally sound. Prof is enthusiatic and obvioulsy highly qualified. Really appreciate the proofs he provides such as the geometric development of the trig derivatives, the chain rule, and the fundamental theorem. I'd give it 5 stars for content and clarity. I am disappointed that some of the lectures were out of sequence with the quizzes and I really found that entering the answers to quizz questions was difficult. In some cases the tool misled me i.e. when the question indicated E should be entered for Euler's constant but the grading tool required e. Also in one instance the grading tool didn't recognize the right answer and I believe the correct answer wasn't even available as one of the choices. | were out of sequence with the | Quizz | and I really found that entering | Positive | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | teacher doesn't teach what is on the quizzes. -_- | doesn't teach what is on the | Quizz | -_- | Negative | -0.64 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | An awesome course! The teacher is good, and the calendar is well organized. However, as to me, there are some points that have not been explained clearly and the some quizzes are just terrible. Hope to see the improvements. | been explained clearly and the some | Quizz | are just terrible. Hope to see | Negative | -0.97 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | nice if Coursera could review the | Quizz | addenda and update the quizzes. It | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | the quiz addenda and update the | Quizz | It is very demoralizing to take | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very well presented course. Jim Fowler is a fantastic teacher; he makes it enjoyable and relevant. It would be nice if Coursera could review the quiz addenda and update the quizzes. It is very demoralizing to take and retake a quiz due to an incorrect answer, only to find out that the automatic grader is wrong! I'd gladly take more courses with this presenter. | demoralizing to take and retake a | Quizz | due to an incorrect answer, only | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Solid course. Good instructor. The quizzes, however, often were inconsistent on how to input Euler's number so that it could be read by the computer. 1 quiz had an item that did not contain a question (Thank god it was multiple choice) , and the last exam asked you to select between two answers which identical except for the fact that one added zero from x and one subtracted zero from x. | be read by the computer. 1 | Quizz | had an item that did not | Negative | -0.9 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent course and very motivating teacher. I think more real life examples could be used, especialy in quizzes. Very compelling for begginers! | examples could be used, especialy in | Quizz | Very compelling for begginers! | Positive | 0.72 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Dr Fowler is very enthusiastic, which is one of the most notable and best things about this course. Although some reviews complain that he over-explains things, I personally found this really helpful - you are taught not just how to do the calculations, but how they work fundamentally, which for me is a pretty important thing if I am to fully understand. The course is slightly above my level in some aspects, but I managed to pass with 100%, which I am very proud of! I'd say some basic knowledge of Calculus helps, but even if you are only just learning, I'd say this is set out in such a way that one could pick it up alright from this course. Only complaint is the sometimes glitchy quizzes, although the forums often say if there are any and how to get around them. Overall, I do recommend this course! | Only complaint is the sometimes glitchy | Quizz | although the forums often say if | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Great course! Everything is explained extremely clearly. The only 'missing star' here is that some of the final quizzes reject the correct answer due to a technical issue. | is that some of the final | Quizz | reject the correct answer due to | Positive | 0.94 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I wanted the preview function on the quiz to be like "scratch paper". | wanted the preview function on the | Quizz | to be like " scratch paper" | Negative | -0.72 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I have never seen anybody who taught like Prof. Jim Fowler !!!!.Only he tells the "WHY" hidden behind every question. -Videos were FUN. -Practice Quizzes were making our understanding more clear about each topic. -End quizzes were extremely helpful. -Taking notes from his videos is "WORTH". THANK YOU | every question. -Videos were FUN. -Practice | Quizz | were making our understanding more clear | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent lecture videos and quizzes. Got a lot of help. | Excellent lecture videos and | Quizz | Got a lot of help. | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I thought this was a well presented course with good coverage of the material. Only thing holding me back from giving it a five start rating is a few errors in the quizzes need to be fixed. | is a few errors in the | Quizz | need to be fixed. | Negative | -0.77 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This was a very interesting course. I hadn't done any calculus for 40 years and it was wonderful to get back to it. I really enjoyed Jim's enthusiasm and the explanation of the fundamentals of calculus. . It would have been helpful to have the errors in the marking of quizzes corrected as they had been pointed out and acknowledged months ago. | the errors in the marking of | Quizz | corrected as they had been pointed | Negative | -0.93 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The teacher is great The course is fun The way I have to enter answers in quizes is boring, but doable. | I have to enter answers in | Quizz | is boring, but doable. | Negative | -0.98 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | The classes are very didactic, however the professor sometimes meanders too much and doesn't get to the point. Also, some of the the quizzes have little or nothing to do with the video lessons. | point. Also, some of the the | Quizz | have little or nothing to do | Negative | -0.99 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Five stars, even though there were some errors in the quizes and inconsistencies of parsing E/e. But that's a minor issue when you have such an amazing lectures in the course. I've praised Jim for Calculus Two and I praise him again for this course. Superb instructor, the best I've seen thus far after working on tens of Math/CS MOOCs. I wish there were more courses from him, a really gifted teacher and amazing mathematician. | there were some errors in the | Quizz | and inconsistencies of parsing E/e. But | Negative | -0.85 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | This is actually good. the tutor is very fun and it makes me feel clearly about calculus. But, it will be more excellent if this course give a short quiz for each topic in end of the section. And for the final test, can this course give more test? I mean like more question in number or kind of test. | if this course give a short | Quizz | for each topic in end of | Positive | 0.64 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Some of the contents just seem overly complex, especially the videos. If they would do a few problems similar to those in the quizzes, it would be much more better. | problems similar to those in the | Quizz | it would be much more better. | Negative | -0.88 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Awesome, in depth, just the quizzes seem a bit difficult to comprehend. | Awesome, in depth, just the | Quizz | seem a bit difficult to comprehend. | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | There is some good material in this course. The text is fairly good. But I have two main reservations about the course. The first is that the lectures do not always correspond closely enough with the quizzes, and with the text. There are times when one can take a quiz and think, "How exactly does this relate to the lectures I just saw?" The text has quite a few exercises, but there is a tendency to throw in one or two problems whose difficulty is an order of magnitude above everything else in that section, and I find this discouraging and a waste of time. Save those for a later course, or put them into a separate "Extra Challenges" section. Learning calculus is hard enough without trying to grapple without some really tricky trig problem at the same time. as a single example. The second reservation is with the instructor's manner. Many students find it very enjoyable. I am not one of them. Much of the time, he's OK, especially when the camera is not pointed at him. But as the course progresses, much of the footage is of him at his desk, and the closeups become more and more extreme, the hand-waving and fist-clenching approach sheer windmilling, and the exaggerated eye-rolling, grinning and so forth become so distracting that I can't bear to watch. I realize that the goal was to avoid being a dry-as-dust droning professor, and that is commendable, but there is a happy middle ground between that and hamming. I can almost speculate that there was an impulse to add in cartoon sproing-bonk-cuckoo-klaxon sound effects. (There is actually one such sound effect, but just one, so I won't quibble on that.) I would have found the class more effective with a demeanor that was enthusiastic without being histrionic. I'm sure this is one of those "you either love it or hate it" things, and I may be in the minority. The instructor is not generally one to throw out some concept that has not already been learned and then just motor on without explanation. He errs on the side of overly-detailed explanation, which to me is preferable to skipping over subjects or techniques and assuming you know them. Having said all of this, I repeat that there is good material, and you can learn the fundamentals of calculus for free in this course. | always correspond closely enough with the | Quizz | and with the text. There are | Positive | 0.63 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I thought the professor was really great about explaining things in a clear, concise manner. I think some of the quiz problems were more complicated than they needed to be, especially considering that typing in a long string you're very likely to have a typo which results in missing a question you knew how to do. | manner. I think some of the | Quizz | problems were more complicated than they | Positive | 0.86 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Nothing is making sense. None of the videos are related to the quiz. None of the examples are remotely related to the quiz to even give you a suggestion on how to solve them. | the videos are related to the | Quizz | None of the examples are remotely | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Nothing is making sense. None of the videos are related to the quiz. None of the examples are remotely related to the quiz to even give you a suggestion on how to solve them. | examples are remotely related to the | Quizz | to even give you a suggestion | Negative | -0.97 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Excellent lectures, and funny, too! I enjoyed this course. There is some problem with some quiz answers that should be fixed. | There is some problem with some | Quizz | answers that should be fixed. | Negative | -0.91 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | get new material - new videos these videos for all your classes are years old - the quizes dont relate to the material taught and it seems you guys got this set up years ago and just forgot about it | classes are years old - the | Quizz | dont relate to the material taught | Positive | 0.98 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I enjoyed it. Jim Fowler does well, his enthusiasm and the time and effort he (and whatever filming and editing team he has) have put into the presentation is impressive. Difficult for me to rate it as a maths course - how would I know whether it covers what it needs and have anything meaningful to stay about the standard of it. I felt I understood what was going on, I passed the quizzes. Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug in the quizes - nothing you can't work around (eg totally blank question but four answers to choose from.) The mathematical symbol rendering doesn't work on the mobile app at all. | was going on, I passed the | Quizz | Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug | Negative | -0.86 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | I enjoyed it. Jim Fowler does well, his enthusiasm and the time and effort he (and whatever filming and editing team he has) have put into the presentation is impressive. Difficult for me to rate it as a maths course - how would I know whether it covers what it needs and have anything meaningful to stay about the standard of it. I felt I understood what was going on, I passed the quizzes. Maybe that's all good? Occasional bug in the quizes - nothing you can't work around (eg totally blank question but four answers to choose from.) The mathematical symbol rendering doesn't work on the mobile app at all. | all good? Occasional bug in the | Quizz | - nothing you can't work around | Positive | 0.64 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| HRSOu-BiEeOZpyIACyeXpA | Fun refresher for someone that took Calculus 30 years ago. Great lectures and examples. Quiz answers don't always use the proper "upper case E" for e correctly, so be prepared to be marked down for correct answers sometimes (but you can "correct" your answers on retake). It would be great to get this fixed! | years ago. Great lectures and examples. | Quizz | answers don't always use the proper | Positive | 0.64 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.05 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | Good course, but the SWIRL exercises (and a few quiz questions) needed to be updated for the latest version of ggplot2. | the SWIRL exercises (and a few | Quizz | questions) needed to be updated for | Negative | -0.72 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 0.95 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | The final project did not require use of the material in the course beyond the first week and a half. I did not take any quizzes or otherwise have my knowledge tested on the material in the second half of the course. | half. I did not take any | Quizz | or otherwise have my knowledge tested | Negative | -0.8 | -0.5 | 0.89 | 0.95 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | My congratulations to all those people who worked to create this course although I have to pick up something I've found a bit annoying: 1- there were two video where the audio were nearly unintelligible 2- I would link the link proposed by the video to be possible to be clicked 3- Some exposition imperfection (even if they make these video more "real and human") 4- Since quiz are not so difficult to be evaluated automatically I found it a bit annoying to notice them locked by not-purchsing, even if I understand there have to be something which would make the customer to purchase. I've found the swirl experience great although a bit annoying sometimes but I've no clue on how to possibly improve it so. Keep up with this great work! Bye | real and human" ) 4- Since | Quizz | are not so difficult to be | Positive | 0.77 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 0.95 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | A quiz or project question on k-means clustering or PCA would be nice. Overall the course provided solid coverage of the three main plotting systems in R. | A | Quizz | or project question on k-means clustering | Negative | -0.67 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 0.95 |
| hwiBZm0vEeWbyw5d8C-Blw | Excellent class with easy-to-understand videos. The quizzes and homework really help me master the topics. | Excellent class with easy-to-understand videos. The | Quizz | and homework really help me master | Positive | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 0.95 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | It's Ok, but it feels like it was put together in a rush. There are no assignments, no forums, and there are many typos in the quizzes. I enjoyed the first course of this specialization much more than this one. | there are many typos in the | Quizz | I enjoyed the first course of | Positive | 0.99 | 0.0 | 0.59 | 0.8 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | This course is a bit repetitive and provides only a few real life examples. As well as this, the evaluation of this course is based on the result of a single quiz of 15 questions, which is not enough to prove any knowledge at all. I think it should focus on a more practice oriented course in order to master the price optimization process and see how it fluctuates in real life examples. However, this course gives great insights and useful concepts that are of huge importance to the application of the revenue management activities. | on the result of a single | Quizz | of 15 questions, which is not | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.59 | 0.8 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | A very interesting course outlining the important of good revenue management and flexible pricing to maximize hotel revenue and profits. I would welcome a few more practical exercises DURING the course and not only on the final quiz. Also, it would be good to have the tables and presentations on .pdf or . jpg format as details are not readable behind the presenter. Looking forward to the next course in this specialization, namely Demand Management. | and not only on the final | Quizz | Also, it would be good to | Negative | -0.98 | 0.5 | 0.59 | 0.8 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Tests and quizzes don't really ask the right things and the answers given are hard to understand. Bad quizzes but lectures informative. | Tests and | Quizz | don't really ask the right things | Negative | -0.7 | 0.0 | 0.59 | 0.8 |
| HXsj6jeHEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Tests and quizzes don't really ask the right things and the answers given are hard to understand. Bad quizzes but lectures informative. | given are hard to understand. Bad | Quizz | but lectures informative. | Negative | -0.66 | 0.0 | 0.59 | 0.8 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I enjoyed the combination of hands on creative exercises and quizzes. I will forever remember " You learn to be a designer by designing" | of hands on creative exercises and | Quizz | I will forever remember " You | Positive | 0.72 | 1.0 | 0.77 | 0.98 |
| I82JCSWXEeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I think this course was great- it really got you exploring and experimenting. I do think that there should be more REQUIRED briefs. Two of the modules out of the four were quiz's which was a little disappointing. I also think there needs to be some online help. In the last brief there was a large discussion as a lot of students were confused about the task and nobody stepped up to help clear the air- this is the reason I gave this course 4 not 5 stars. | modules out of the four were | Quizz | which was a little disappointing. I | Negative | -0.73 | 0.5 | 0.77 | 0.98 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | very good introduction but as i go through the videos and then do the quiz i feel like the material doesn't highlight exactly what is needed for the quiz. Maybe i'm not taking the video lecture as seriously as i should. Something else to reinforce the material cause it seems a bit condensed. thanks for a wonderful course! | the videos and then do the | Quizz | i feel like the material doesn't | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.66 | 0.96 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | very good introduction but as i go through the videos and then do the quiz i feel like the material doesn't highlight exactly what is needed for the quiz. Maybe i'm not taking the video lecture as seriously as i should. Something else to reinforce the material cause it seems a bit condensed. thanks for a wonderful course! | exactly what is needed for the | Quizz | Maybe i'm not taking the video | Negative | -0.94 | 0.5 | 0.66 | 0.96 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | Thanks for overview of experimental methods and references to relevant articles! "Complete the essay" quizzes looks like a joke | relevant articles! " Complete the essay" | Quizz | looks like a joke | Negative | -1.0 | 0.5 | 0.66 | 0.96 |
| iCIGe_T6EeS-1yIAC7MN4w | On the bright side, "Lab based" videos are excellent for visualize the techniques. Nevertheless "Choose all that apply" questions in the quizzes are very ambiguous, these questions should contain an explanation for prevent confusion at the end of every unit. | all that apply" questions in the | Quizz | are very ambiguous, these questions should | Positive | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.66 | 0.96 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | There are serious issues with the quizzes. Other than grading correct/incorrect, there is no feedback afterwards. | There are serious issues with the | Quizz | Other than grading correct/incorrect, there is | Negative | -0.63 | 0.0 | 0.92 | 0.98 |
| IjAlbH3IEeWb-BLhFdaGww | WOOO .. This course is great ,, with the quiz in between the video lectures makes learning fun. the home work problems are also great to work. More emphasis laid on the simulations results to be read correctly and reflecting those results onto the solution for the home work problems... still looking forward more to learn and simulate..... | is great , , with the | Quizz | in between the video lectures makes | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.92 | 0.98 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | making shoping and cooking easier, not difficult, quizzes are great; it helped me a lot when shaping my new diet | shoping and cooking easier, not difficult, | Quizz | are great; it helped me a | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I loved the course! I loved the way that the different issues are explained, I like the graphics, the videos, the quizzes - everything! I just tried for the Passover the almond cake recepie and it was fantastic! I really recommend this course not only for child nutrition but also for 'picky' and stubborn adults. Thanks!! | like the graphics, the videos, the | Quizz | - everything! I just tried for | Negative | -0.86 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | just wanted more. In addition, the | Quizz | are so easy as to be | Negative | -0.74 | -1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | I am really disappointed with the content of this course. If what you're looking for is the most basic of information on making better choices and remembering to wash your cutting board after handling raw meat, maybe this course is for you. If, however, you come to this course wanting specific information about how to build great meals for babies, toddlers, and young children, or you'd like to know how their needs change over time, this course is not for you. I was hoping for information like how to teach your toddler to chew/eat difficult things (ex: whole apples). I wanted to know at what age/weight you switch to 2% milk. I wanted to know how many calories a meal should be based on height and weight and how that changes over time. I wanted to know medically verified tips on getting the right amount of each nutrient into a toddler's diet and what, if any, extra vitamins should be added. I wanted tips on weaning if you're still nursing a toddler... I guess I just wanted more. In addition, the quizzes are so easy as to be silly. Actual quiz question and correct answer: Which is NOT a good way to approach grocery shopping if healthy choices are desired? Answer: Visit the supermarket hungry and walk through the candy aisle first. COME ON! Did I need a Stanford University course to tell me that one?!?!? While the instructor is knowledgeable, this course is geared toward someone with NO knowledge, not someone who wants to gain a deeper understanding. The videos are painfully slow (am I waiting for a doodle here???) and I could read the entire course worth of transcripts in under a half hour rather than go through all of the videos. And the recipes... good god! I don't think that someone interested in learning more about child nutrition is needing a slow tutorial on how to make basic oatmeal on the stove top. If she'd upped the game- showed basics and then talked about the benefits of adding, say, chia seeds, different fruits, flax, etc. and how best to make a basic bowl of oatmeal into a complete breakfast, that would have been a useful topic. I'm just hugely disappointed. This course is best suited to perhaps a health department; not to someone seeking college level information about a topic that matters to their children's lives. | easy as to be silly. Actual | Quizz | question and correct answer: Which is | Negative | -0.65 | -1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Great and easy explained with video's and drawings. Loved the cooking demo's for some fresh and homemade meals. Also great for families with no children since there are basic food facts everyone should know about. Quizzes are fun and informative and the time needed to follow up was enough even with deadlines. | food facts everyone should know about. | Quizz | are fun and informative and the | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Course content is balanced with demonstrations and charts, along with quizzes. Enjoyed it. | with demonstrations and charts, along with | Quizz | Enjoyed it. | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | This was a good introduction to Coursera for me. Some of the information I already knew, but it was good to learn the "why" behind some of it. There were a few of the quizzes that contained questions from videos that hadn't been covered yet. Her information about food allergies was good, I would like to see her offer a class on just that topic. | There were a few of the | Quizz | that contained questions from videos that | Negative | -0.7 | 0.5 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iQZflcZ7EeOoFhIxOQQuEA | Great Class! Wish that the quizzes were more difficult -- they were very straight forward and common sense. The cooking videos inspired me to cook with more variety in my own meals. | Great Class! Wish that the | Quizz | were more difficult -- they were | Positive | 0.67 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.24 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Well-structured lessons, comprehensively covers planning & initiation stages of project management. The quizzes felt a little easy at times! | initiation stages of project management. The | Quizz | felt a little easy at times! | Positive | 0.85 | 0.5 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | Could be in much greater depth. Loved the video lectures: more please! Perhaps a second video lecture per week that delves into greater detail, so that the level of discussion is more in line with the PMBOK. The quizzes were simplistic, which is fine, but the final was literally just questions from the quizzes pasted together (all were repeats!) This sad fact undermines the integrity of the final as an actual test of ability and comprehension. | was literally just questions from the | Quizz | pasted together (all were repeats! ) | Negative | -0.9 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I like the materials, but I don't like that you need to pay to take the quizzes. I think that it is against the spirit of Coursera because it limits the experience of user who are willing to learn but don't have enough money to pay for the course. Many other courses allow you to take quizzes and do projects whitout paying | need to pay to take the | Quizz | I think that it is against | Negative | -0.63 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I like the materials, but I don't like that you need to pay to take the quizzes. I think that it is against the spirit of Coursera because it limits the experience of user who are willing to learn but don't have enough money to pay for the course. Many other courses allow you to take quizzes and do projects whitout paying | other courses allow you to take | Quizz | and do projects whitout paying | Negative | -0.68 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | The content is good but the quiz and final exam are way too easy... | The content is good but the | Quizz | and final exam are way too | Negative | -0.97 | 0.0 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | I liked everything about this course except that some of the lesson materials couldn't be viewed on my iPad as they were flash based. Other than that, the videos were good - not too long, not too short - and the quizzes were suitably based on what was discussed beforehand in the lectures and lessons. I also picked up one of the recommended readings "Fast Forward MBA in Project Management" which I also liked. | not too short - and the | Quizz | were suitably based on what was | Negative | -0.66 | 0.5 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iRBJm_LREeSplSIACzYDNg | This course packed a lot in and was very direct and efficient, giving helpful examples to illustrate the points. The project management tools learned can be applied in so many situations even for those of us who will never have the official title of "project manager". Videos are supplemented by flash lessons that go over the information, which was great for learners who may not learn as well by video alone. I would have liked one or two written assignments, but quizzes were relevant to the information provided and it was nice not to have to wait on peer-reviews. Overall, a great course. | one or two written assignments, but | Quizz | were relevant to the information provided | Positive | 0.71 | 0.5 | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course sets the stage for the rest of the Data Science specialisation. You get a lot of textbooks for free and they cover a lot of material. The quizzes are a little bit underwhelming, especially the first week. Too few questions, testing some questionable knowledge (eg, what other courses there are in the specialisation -- hardly a required tool in the data scientist's box). Overall, it's a good preparation for what is to come. It managed to whet my appetite for more , however I'm not sure the course is very useful on its own. | cover a lot of material. The | Quizz | are a little bit underwhelming, especially | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Great course! well paced and timing appropriate. Quizes reflected taught lessons. | course! well paced and timing appropriate. | Quizz | reflected taught lessons. | Positive | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very basic even for people with no DS background. Issues with quiz having passed and results showing as failed. Inability to speed up and move on to next module | with no DS background. Issues with | Quizz | having passed and results showing as | Negative | -0.68 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | All excellent and a very good introduction. I wish I was able to get my quiz graded without having to pay just to see if I was learning. For the rest, I recommended for a great intro. | I was able to get my | Quizz | graded without having to pay just | Negative | -0.67 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | course. My only complaint is the | Quizz | it often feels impossible to get | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It's a good first step into getting the right programs, learning key vocabulary, and interacting with important websites/programs at a very introductory level. If you are not from a math/statistics background you can still complete the course but you will not understand the previews for later courses completely, that is ok! But consider getting the eBook with this course. My only complaint is the quizzes, it often feels impossible to get a 5/5 based on only what you get from the lectures, there's always 1 question that is completely over the top compared to the other 4, but you can do the quizzes 3 times every 8 hours and just trial and error the 1 gotcha question on each quiz. | 4, but you can do the | Quizz | 3 times every 8 hours and | Negative | -0.64 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course is a good first into to the topic. I think that the additional reading from the book and the Git manual will supplement it very well. My only complain is that in the first quiz, there was a question regarding some R packages used in Machine Learning that were not covered in the slides. It took me a while to find those so I had to take the first quiz 3 times. I think this question should be revised to guide the student as to how to find these packages. Another alternative would be that in the slides there some guidance in this matter. Otherwise, I liked to course and the final assignments. | complain is that in the first | Quizz | there was a question regarding some | Negative | -0.83 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | This course is a good first into to the topic. I think that the additional reading from the book and the Git manual will supplement it very well. My only complain is that in the first quiz, there was a question regarding some R packages used in Machine Learning that were not covered in the slides. It took me a while to find those so I had to take the first quiz 3 times. I think this question should be revised to guide the student as to how to find these packages. Another alternative would be that in the slides there some guidance in this matter. Otherwise, I liked to course and the final assignments. | I had to take the first | Quizz | 3 times. I think this question | Negative | -0.77 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | There were lectures about how to install R and RStudio on Mac and Windows. And the quiz asked about information on these lectures. You must pay attention to them even if you have previously installed them. | on Mac and Windows. And the | Quizz | asked about information on these lectures. | Positive | 0.66 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Quizzes were based off of extremely high level overview videos not covering anything specifically or deep diving into anything. When applying the git commands covered, numerous errors arose. Overwhelmingly academic course with very little hands on. This is not for anyone actually looking to work in this field, but for someone looking to be able to talk about this field. | | Quizz | were based off of extremely high | Negative | -0.62 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | 4.5 Stars. Decent introduction. Good reading material and quizzes. Would like to have more hands-on assignments. | Decent introduction. Good reading material and | Quizz | Would like to have more hands-on | Negative | -0.85 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | It is a nice introduction, but the material is barely worth a one week orientation lesson (I have completed it in about 4 hours with watching all the videos, taking detailed notes, and completing the quizzes for 100%) . Why should we pay for a specialization preview, we can read info about the separate courses on our own? I am really looking forward the next courses in the specialization since I really need a good course in statistics and this seems to be one, but the first course should be eliminated. The installation of R and github account videos should be added to the next course as an introduction. | taking detailed notes, and completing the | Quizz | for 100%) . Why should we | Negative | -0.85 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | A good introduction to the course. Opening up quizzes to help feedback what we'd learned (for free learners) would have made the course much better! | introduction to the course. Opening up | Quizz | to help feedback what we'd learned | Positive | 0.92 | 0.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The first week's quiz is really difficult and I had to go through the lecture material several times. Because of the great number of very short lectures it is difficult to find an asnwer to sought question. | The first week's | Quizz | is really difficult and I had | Negative | -0.62 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The course is in fact an overall intro to the full data science specialization. Some of the content are useful; but some of the quiz questions are not very informative, and don't really test on stats... | are useful; but some of the | Quizz | questions are not very informative, and | Negative | -0.64 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | I have completed the Data Scientist's Toolbox. I enjoyed learning this course. I learned a lot of new concepts, installation of R, R Studio, hands-on with these and GITHUB. The lessons are well balanced and help me learn the concepts and the tool usage in a cool way. I liked the Quizzes, Assignments as these help me evaluate myself and instill confidence within me. Now, I've the confidence in work on any of these with certain amount of instructions. However, I feel that certain guidance on progressing further with respect to R, RStudio, GITHUB could be provided as additional study material. Thanks to Coursera for providing such a wonderful course and to Prof. Roger D. Peng, Jeff Leek and Brian D. Caffo for their meticulous effort in designing this course and helping in my learning. Wishing my Professors and Coursera all the Success. | a cool way. I liked the | Quizz | Assignments as these help me evaluate | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very good course materials, videos and quizzes. Learnt a lot. :D | Very good course materials, videos and | Quizz | Learnt a lot. :D | Positive | 0.87 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Useful couple of modules for helping you get set up with R and Git/GitHub. Really doesn't require a full month to do. The quizzes were pointless. | a full month to do. The | Quizz | were pointless. | Negative | -0.94 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | Very informative course. The Quiz questions however may not be necessarily be in the course content. | Very informative course. The | Quizz | questions however may not be necessarily | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iSxVEG07EeW3YxLB1q9I2w | The new graphic is really nice and helpful. Even the fact that you can retake the quizzes after 8 hours is really nice. I have noticed that there wasn't any possibility to download pdf files of the lessons (or I didn't see it), the last time I took the course there was this possibility and I found it so helpful. | fact that you can retake the | Quizz | after 8 hours is really nice. | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 | 0.95 | 1.07 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Material was very good and well structured. I think that one main issue is the assignment. We would need much more info/hard facts to make it much more interesting (i.e. less theoritical). Moreover, assignments are reviewed by people 1/ who did not necessarily went through the 2 previous courses 2/ did not see our previous documents ie for course 1 and 2 3/ did not necessarily understand the question (one person complained because I did not answer the question "edgy vs. conservative" => I guess she was misled by the support info which were the same as for the first course). This problem could be avoided by offering a distinct case for each assignment, so that there is no confusion/mis-match. In any case, "mange tak" for all your courses. I went through 3 so far, and the ones from CBS are clearly the best I had (videos - content and speed - slides/ support documents, quizzes). | and speed - slides/ support documents, | Quizz | | Positive | 0.65 | 0.0 | 0.67 | 0.67 |
| iXq6zSWTEeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Shame that the format was changed and the quizzes and assignments were not open. Teaching was as great as the first 2 courses, and slides were useful. | the format was changed and the | Quizz | and assignments were not open. Teaching | Negative | -0.68 | 0.0 | 0.67 | 0.67 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The video lectures provide an introduction to quadrotor flight dynamics and path planning. The lectures are ok. Unfortunately: At least one of the coding assignments has a significant bug in the termination condition. The mentors will ignore any help requests that deal with the bug in their code. The assignments involve a lot of hand tuning of PD controllers. That's a reasonable task to perform once or twice, but it rapidly becomes extremely tedious and detracts from the other materials that are being taught. The final assignment doesn't do a particularly good job evaluating the required test condition. If you do take the course I'd want you to know: You should expect to modify the provided code to fix their bugs. There are no "gotcha" quiz questions. If you are confused by getting a question wrong you might want to re-try your answer. There seems to be a bug in the way at least one quiz question is set up. On the final assignment you can modify the simulation step where it makes things run in "real time". Removing that step makes the simulation run much more quickly and allows for faster iteration. To conclude: This is a course with a lot of potential, but unless Coursera makes an effort to improve the course I would not recommend it. | bugs. There are no " gotcha" | Quizz | questions. If you are confused by | Negative | -0.7 | -1.0 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The video lectures provide an introduction to quadrotor flight dynamics and path planning. The lectures are ok. Unfortunately: At least one of the coding assignments has a significant bug in the termination condition. The mentors will ignore any help requests that deal with the bug in their code. The assignments involve a lot of hand tuning of PD controllers. That's a reasonable task to perform once or twice, but it rapidly becomes extremely tedious and detracts from the other materials that are being taught. The final assignment doesn't do a particularly good job evaluating the required test condition. If you do take the course I'd want you to know: You should expect to modify the provided code to fix their bugs. There are no "gotcha" quiz questions. If you are confused by getting a question wrong you might want to re-try your answer. There seems to be a bug in the way at least one quiz question is set up. On the final assignment you can modify the simulation step where it makes things run in "real time". Removing that step makes the simulation run much more quickly and allows for faster iteration. To conclude: This is a course with a lot of potential, but unless Coursera makes an effort to improve the course I would not recommend it. | in the way at least one | Quizz | question is set up. On the | Negative | -0.69 | -1.0 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | A good overview on various fields of Robotics, especially control. Quizzes seemed a little ambiguous but lectures and assignments were very informative! | various fields of Robotics, especially control. | Quizz | seemed a little ambiguous but lectures | Positive | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The quiz and assignment are poorly designed. Important issues are overlooked or just briefly discussed in lecture. The assignment focuses on matlab coding, which only emphasizes the coding technique. Do not recommend to audience with | The | Quizz | and assignment are poorly designed. Important | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Quizzes and Assignments are poorly designed. You will spend most of your time tuning parameters and deriving matrices that were never discussed in the course. Unfortunate. | | Quizz | and Assignments are poorly designed. You | Negative | -0.99 | -0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Good course overall, since I took it the first time it was offered it was still not quite polished. I liked the focus on quadrocopter simulation and creating controllers. I think it would benefit from more specific discussion forums for quizzes/assignments, being able to view past quiz attempts, and cleaning up typos/errors in the material. | quizzes/assignments, being able to view past | Quizz | attempts, and cleaning up typos/errors in | Positive | 0.84 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | There were minor errors in the quizzes but I loved the course, would be nice to use some open source tool besides matlab. Best regards. | There were minor errors in the | Quizz | but I loved the course, would | Negative | -0.74 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Although not specifically stated as a requisite this course does rely heavily on mathematics (especially matrix calculations). I did not understand all of the mathematics but was still able to complete the course succesfully. The general idea behind the math was well enough explained. The example videos, excercises and quizes were great fun and inspiring. | explained. The example videos, excercises and | Quizz | were great fun and inspiring. | Positive | 0.98 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Very interesting course. Lectures were very informative however some test questions, especially in first quiz, where not covered directly in course materials. | some test questions, especially in first | Quizz | where not covered directly in course | Positive | 0.73 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | Quizzes are generally not related to topic but course is great. Thanks.. | | Quizz | are generally not related to topic | Negative | -0.65 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The material this course provided is sufficient for a beginner in robotics. But I have to say that the material the coursed presented is not well prepared. The lectures are not well organized. Some necessary prerequisite should be at least provided as reading materials. Quizs ask some questions that is not clearly mentioned in the lecture and some are with a little ambiguity. | at least provided as reading materials. | Quizz | ask some questions that is not | Negative | -0.69 | -0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | The content is awesome and the quizzes and assignments are challenging. What I would incorporate is a little bit more of examples to tackle all the problems new people might encounter (more sample numerical results, and probably samples on how to develop in Matlab, not just reserved words). | The content is awesome and the | Quizz | and assignments are challenging. What I | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| jHCTx1u-EeWylgpjfV1KVQ | could me much better , if the questions in the quiz can actually related to the lecture | , if the questions in the | Quizz | can actually related to the lecture | Negative | -0.69 | 0.5 | 1.02 | 1.03 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Great introduction-- not a single lesson was lacking. Professor Noor is engaging, feels approachable (even behind a screen), and I found the class appropriately challenging. There were times I felt I completely grasped the "important" parts of lectures only to begin a quiz and realize that I didn't. The quizzes really helped me to see that I had to understand much more about how to apply the messages to other situations, or compound scenarios. Good lesson in logic. Computation also matters in this course, which can be tough for someone more used to reading pop-science analyses. I appreciated being held accountable and learned far more than I would if I'd just read a book. | of lectures only to begin a | Quizz | and realize that I didn't. The | Negative | -0.88 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.11 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | Professor Noor is very friendly and clear in his lectures. He also answers questions in the discussion foruns with speed and detail. I was able to learn a lot from this course and challenged myself to a heavier load of lectures than I had expected because they were not boring at all. My only caveat is that the questions in his quizzes can sometimes be unnecessarily confusing because of wording or tricks. | is that the questions in his | Quizz | can sometimes be unnecessarily confusing because | Negative | -0.85 | 0.5 | 0.86 | 1.11 |
| k9p3Qh8kEeWP0w4yK2369w | The lecture materials are interesting and informative. And the quizzes require an understanding of the material. I really enjoyed this course and learned a lot about genetics and evolution. Thank you again. | are interesting and informative. And the | Quizz | require an understanding of the material. | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.11 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | you cannot do the quizes unless you pay | you cannot do the | Quizz | unless you pay | Negative | -0.74 | -1.0 | 1.14 | 1.2 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | This course is very helpful. I have kept learning this course and completed the quiz. It helps me understand the mechanism of the addiction, what is dopamine and how it works, the class of the illicit drugs, the animal self-administration model and what can I learn from the animal experiment, the vulnerability for addiction, and risk and protective factors of addiction, neuroimaging studies of addiction. Most of all, I have a better understanding of addiction. The pronunciation of the Professor is so clear and helps me to improve my English. Thanks very much. I enjoy it. | learning this course and completed the | Quizz | It helps me understand the mechanism | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.2 |
| knivtHEHEeSfpCIACzWBZw | The individual course topics were evenly distributed and presented in a meticulous, thorough, as well as elaborate manner. The lecturer was inviting and encouraging, whereas the technical specifications of the video lectures and quizzes were exceptionally good. In overall, the ''Addicted Brain'' course positively predisposes me towards opting for more courses provided and sponsored by the Emory University. | specifications of the video lectures and | Quizz | were exceptionally good. In overall, the | Negative | -0.65 | 1.0 | 1.14 | 1.2 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The course content is quite elaborate and very detailed. Assignments and explanation,quiz was all excellent. | and very detailed. Assignments and explanation, | Quizz | was all excellent. | Positive | 0.68 | 1.0 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | Excellent course! Extremely well organized and definitely provides a lot of great information. The quiz questions are too easy, which is why it's not 5 stars. | a lot of great information. The | Quizz | questions are too easy, which is | Positive | 0.93 | 0.5 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | The answer choices for the | Quizz | are so obvious and can be | Negative | -0.99 | 0.0 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | student really think. Also the final | Quizz | is just a repetition of questions | Negative | -0.76 | 0.0 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| L7stsPOKEeSlpiIAC7NwBA | The answer choices for the quiz are so obvious and can be easily guessed. It can be improved to make the student really think. Also the final quiz is just a repetition of questions we see in the module quiz. It can be different to test the effectiveness of the student. | questions we see in the module | Quizz | It can be different to test | Positive | 0.85 | 0.0 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Well done. Focuses mainly on videos to teach the content with an assignment at the end of the week that uses everything you learned. I would rate 5 stars if it had more quizzes or exercises to do before the week's assignment. At any rate you learn a lot about Html, css, and JS and it's a worthy class in this specialization. | 5 stars if it had more | Quizz | or exercises to do before the | Negative | -0.89 | 0.5 | 0.82 | 1.07 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good lectures, interesting quizes, good assessments. Perfect! | Good lectures, interesting | Quizz | good assessments. Perfect! | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 0.82 | 1.07 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Good one. Going from Basics to little bit advance. Nice assignments and Quiz added in course. | little bit advance. Nice assignments and | Quizz | added in course. | Positive | 0.68 | 0.5 | 0.82 | 1.07 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Very detailed and great, clear lectures. Very good quizzes and hands-on assignments. Highly recommended for absolutely beginner. | and great, clear lectures. Very good | Quizz | and hands-on assignments. Highly recommended for | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.82 | 1.07 |
| LgWwihnoEeWDtQoum3sFeQ | Pros: A basic introduction to the 3 core front-end technologies. The Professor has structured the course in a logical and easy to follow progressive format. The presentations are professionally done with quality audio and HD video. (The Professor speaks with a clear proper British accent). If watching online, there are helpful short quizzes built into the videos to make sure people are not skipping ahead. (Not sure if these 'video quizzes are graded, but I think they are helpful) Cons: The projects are helpful to reinforce logic and programming concepts, however, they are not real world and may be too simple to be of real value. One will need supplemental resources to fill in the gaps for the projects. I would have liked a real world example, even if it was beyond the scope of the course. | watching online, there are helpful short | Quizz | built into the videos to make | Negative | -0.74 | 0.5 | 0.82 | 1.07 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | I really enjoyed this course. Although I wish there had been more practices to instill the firm knowledge of what the content was. Computer flashcards, or even extra little quizzes in each lesson would have been nice. Other than that, great course, great teacher, and great content! Thank you! | Computer flashcards, or even extra little | Quizz | in each lesson would have been | Negative | -0.88 | 0.5 | 0.82 | 0.91 |
| lHabnht2EeWo5g5SXpDA8Q | fantastic course - only slight issues are quizzes that seek to trick you on the way they are worded rather than actual knowledge, and slight america-centric-ness of the material used (although all material was still fantastic, an example or two from non western poets might have been interesting to add) | course - only slight issues are | Quizz | that seek to trick you on | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.82 | 0.91 |
| LWzwe3KxEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | Learned so much. Great course - good mix of video instruction, mini quizzes & questions, graded quizzes etc. to keep your attention. Also, the information is current and practical. Definitely recommend. | instruction, mini quizzes & questions, graded | Quizz | etc. to keep your attention. Also, | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 | 1.25 | 1.25 |
| LWzwe3KxEeWKsgrp3VnvAw | need to pay to submit quiz. | need to pay to submit | Quizz | | Negative | -0.74 | -1.0 | 1.25 | 1.25 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I really enjoyed this course. It threw me, at first, that the whole course was only lectures -- no videos or readings -- but so much of this course will be applicable to teaching biology that it's useful no matter what. I also had a small problem with verifying quizzes on my phone. | had a small problem with verifying | Quizz | on my phone. | Negative | -0.7 | 0.5 | 0.96 | 1.17 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | Wonderful course. I took it just to satisfy my curiosity. I really enjoyed listening to the lectures and doing the quizzes. Many thanks to the professor for taking the time to make it. I would be happy to see a more advanced version. | to the lectures and doing the | Quizz | Many thanks to the professor for | Positive | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.17 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I thoroughly enjoyed this course. I thought the pace was just right, and the quizzes were just challenging enough to make me review the content more thoughtfully. Thank you for making this course accessible! | pace was just right, and the | Quizz | were just challenging enough to make | Positive | 0.73 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.17 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | I would like to send my thanks to the professor for sharing the course and all the assistants for the efforts you have done. The classes are very interesting and I enjoyed my time while following the classes as well as doing the quiz. | classes as well as doing the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.17 |
| mG1NQnUvEeS8UyIACzYI5Q | The material could be exciting but the presentation is dull. The pass mark on the quizzes is around 80%. As these courses are supposed to be for interest why do you need 80% to pass? | dull. The pass mark on the | Quizz | is around 80%. As these courses | Negative | -0.97 | -0.5 | 0.96 | 1.17 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | Build Your First Android App (Project-Centered Course) is a well organised course with good introductory material covering basics of the android development. I recommend this course to anyone who is new to Android development or anyone who wants to brush up their android development basics. You'll need to work through out this 5 week course. The course material is consolidated with Quizzes. By the end of the course you will know how to prototype, design and code an android application with the best practices in mind using a rubric. Instructors of this course are good too in terms of knowing their stuff and being able to convey and explain it in simple terms. | The course material is consolidated with | Quizz | By the end of the course | Negative | -0.67 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.1 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | The course if well-organized and the instructors do a very good job. However, three weeks of slides and theory and then only the last two weeks of seeing code hardly makes the course project-centered in my mind. Also, requiring learners to upgrade to run an autograder on a quiz is ridiculous! | to run an autograder on a | Quizz | is ridiculous! | Negative | -0.96 | -0.5 | 0.96 | 1.1 |
| mKzzYp5YEeWVBgpelZA5Jw | This is a very good hands-on course to introduce new students to learning Android programming. I have basic knowledge of Java and found this course easy to understand and follow. Suggestion: Change the graded quiz to practice quiz so that non-paying students can submit and check their answers and learn from it. Or find another alternative to Coursera since it is not 100% free for students. I look forward to another building blocks Android course in the future! Thank you for this course! | and follow. Suggestion: Change the graded | Quizz | to practice quiz so that non-paying | Positive | 0.64 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I could not finish this course, although I admire the teacher for preparing this difficult material for English speakers. I have studied several Romance and one Semitic language but I was unable to understand the lectures here. I did pass the first few quizzes but I did not feel that I knew what I was doing. I really am motivated to learn some Chinese because it is like a 2nd or at least 3rd language in my city and very much a 1st or 2nd language in my neighborhood. But I needed something a little more tangible with which to get started . I am sure this says more about my inability than the teacher's ability. I know I am not explaining myself well; I simply mean that to learn a language in which the alphabet is different and the meanings are based on emphasis rather than actual words, requires, I think, perhaps a bit more anchoring for the complete novice. For example, i wish we could have learned some simple conversational phrases, early on, just to get started, without worrying right away about all the sounds. Then once we can do that, we could get a bit more technical. Also, it would be helpful to be referred to a relevant text book. However, thank you for the effort. I hope Coursera will offer more languages since I could not find any other languages in the list. | I did pass the first few | Quizz | but I did not feel that | Negative | -0.96 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Great class! The professor provides great guidance on pronunciation and quizzes are helpful in developing vocabulary. | provides great guidance on pronunciation and | Quizz | are helpful in developing vocabulary. | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | This course was effective in testing what was learned and in testing simple, useful expressions, words, and sentences. However, I would have liked to learn Chinese characters along with the pinyin, as in China reading the characters is just as important as speaking. Also, I believe the quizzes were a bit too simple, there should have been more multiple choice answers to chose from, more questions in general, and even some pronunciation practice. | as speaking. Also, I believe the | Quizz | were a bit too simple, there | Positive | 0.97 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | After many technical issues I decided to try the course using my phone.... and it worked! I enjoyed the rest of the course immensely! :-) I have given this course four stars instead of five as I feel there should have been a few more interactive quizzes to really imbed the target language. I actually used what I learned to chat to some Chinese people in my area! What a wonderful feeling. :-) | have been a few more interactive | Quizz | to really imbed the target language. | Negative | -0.8 | 0.5 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I think, for beginners, it's a good job but the quiz is really hard to use !! | it's a good job but the | Quizz | is really hard to use ! | Positive | 0.93 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Terrible. Had to verify multiple times. Audio quiz had no sound (struck-thru speaker icon I couldn't fix.) I'd be disappointed with Cousera for foisting this trash if I hadn't taken "Learning How to Learn," much less buggy. Would disenroll if there was any way to do so. | Had to verify multiple times. Audio | Quizz | had no sound (struck-thru speaker icon | Negative | -0.75 | -1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I enjoyed the course, the videos and quizzes were easy to understand. This was a great start to learning Mandarin Chinese. Will you offer a continuation course, besides the Chinese calligraphy? ;-) | enjoyed the course, the videos and | Quizz | were easy to understand. This was | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Full of quizzes and tests to test the newly acquired knowledge. This is the way a language should be taught. | Full of | Quizz | and tests to test the newly | Positive | 0.89 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I am giving it a 2 and am leaving the course because several of the recordings in the second quiz don't work. It is not possible to participate when there are technical difficulties like this. If the recordings worked, I am sure it would be a very fun and interesting class. | of the recordings in the second | Quizz | don't work. It is not possible | Negative | -0.81 | -0.5 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I really liked this course because all the lessons are coherent with each other which helps one understand Chinese better. I hope that the quizzes would be more difficult to fully test the student's competence. | Chinese better. I hope that the | Quizz | would be more difficult to fully | Positive | 0.86 | 0.5 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Focuses on pronunciation and basic pinyin. I think this might be a difficult course to start with, although the quizes themselves are very easy. Vocabulary is very lightly covered. | course to start with, although the | Quizz | themselves are very easy. Vocabulary is | Positive | 0.77 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | The course is a very practical approach to the language. The main goal of it being to help you get by in the country. It's title should be Surviving in China 101. Although misleading for people wanting to learn the language to an extensive level, it's definitely a good base to have and to build on. The material is presented in a very accessible manner and the quizzes help you master the key elements acquired within each session. Overall, great class if you plan visiting the country and want to be able to get by without a translator as we all know that not all Chinese natives speak English. | a very accessible manner and the | Quizz | help you master the key elements | Positive | 0.98 | 0.5 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I am having a really good experience. The classes are very easy to understand and the quizzes help me fix the knowledge. I highly recommend this course for people who want to learn the first words in Chinese. | very easy to understand and the | Quizz | help me fix the knowledge. I | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | Excellent chunking of the material, while integrating daily conversational dialogues. Review and quizzes at the end of each section is great. However, I would suggest adding the Chinese characters to the bottom of the pinyin for future Chinese students. | integrating daily conversational dialogues. Review and | Quizz | at the end of each section | Positive | 0.79 | 0.5 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | "Chinese for Beginners" is the best online resource I have found for learning a language. Professor Xiaoyu Liu's presentations are clear and easy to follow. Lectures build on content presented previously. The quizzes provide immediate feedback. The features that I found particularly helpful was the ability to pause after hearing a word, phrase, or sentence the professor said so I could repeat it several times before resuming the lecture. I also appreciated being able to repeat the quizzes as one way of reviewing the material. I hope that Peking University offers another online course for those who have completed "Chinese for Beginners." | build on content presented previously. The | Quizz | provide immediate feedback. The features that | Positive | 0.74 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | "Chinese for Beginners" is the best online resource I have found for learning a language. Professor Xiaoyu Liu's presentations are clear and easy to follow. Lectures build on content presented previously. The quizzes provide immediate feedback. The features that I found particularly helpful was the ability to pause after hearing a word, phrase, or sentence the professor said so I could repeat it several times before resuming the lecture. I also appreciated being able to repeat the quizzes as one way of reviewing the material. I hope that Peking University offers another online course for those who have completed "Chinese for Beginners." | appreciated being able to repeat the | Quizz | as one way of reviewing the | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mTJHKj0pEeSGwyIACxCdDw | I think the quizzes could've been higher quality. Many of the images used in the quizzes were very confusing. Also, i think more character recognition instead of focus on pin yin would've been more beneficial | of the images used in the | Quizz | were very confusing. Also, i think | Positive | 0.82 | 0.0 | 0.83 | 1.1 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | In no way is there enough information given to be able to complete this quiz questions. A total frustration to try to figure out. You can't even figure out what datasets you are expected to analyze! You have to pick one from hundreds that are available! UPDATE: Revising my rating to 3. Course and material improved as course progressed. Week1 very discouraging, but I'm glad I stuck with it. Other weeks were very good. | to be able to complete this | Quizz | questions. A total frustration to try | Negative | -0.66 | 0.0 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | after complains in discussion forum about | Quizz | questions. 5) No feedback for solving | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | answers even after the deadline. 6) | Quizz | questions required methods and logical constructs | Negative | -0.77 | -1.0 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Very frustrating and disappointing experience. The lectures were hard to follow on many levels: 1) The enunciation was unclear and subtitles were often of-the-point, plus they covered-up the code lines that were being discussed. 2) The lecturer often failed to explain logical constructs that were being used, despite the fact that the course should have been understandable with no R cran/Bioconductor experience. 3) The method arguments were either not explained, or very vaguely mentioned, which means applying them to new situations was unnecessarily complicated. 4) No feedback at all was offered from course organisers/reps to anyone, even after complains in discussion forum about quiz questions. 5) No feedback for solving the questions/correct answers even after the deadline. 6) Quiz questions required methods and logical constructs that were not explained/used/mentioned in the lectures. One quiz lacked background information of what data needed to be used (the info was available in the previous version of the course). Some quiz questions were biologically inaccurate i.e. confusing genes/transcripts/exons. | previous version of the course). Some | Quizz | questions were biologically inaccurate i. e. | Negative | -0.81 | -1.0 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Discussions in this course are voiceless and dead and the instructor never appears in discussions. I couldn't understand anything from video lectures: cannot understand enunciation not enough detailed, lack of examples related to the assignments. So the only source was repository http://kasperdanielhansen.github.io/genbioconductor/ with html files. And a lot of searching through bioconductor forums. I liked the relevance of quiz questions to real life genomic questions, but all quiz questions were outstandingly difficult, because of both lack of examples in lectures and errors in some packages inside bioconductor. Overall I expected much more from this course and I cannot recommend it to anyone. | forums. I liked the relevance of | Quizz | questions to real life genomic questions, | Positive | 0.93 | -0.5 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mUSYT5noEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Discussions in this course are voiceless and dead and the instructor never appears in discussions. I couldn't understand anything from video lectures: cannot understand enunciation not enough detailed, lack of examples related to the assignments. So the only source was repository http://kasperdanielhansen.github.io/genbioconductor/ with html files. And a lot of searching through bioconductor forums. I liked the relevance of quiz questions to real life genomic questions, but all quiz questions were outstandingly difficult, because of both lack of examples in lectures and errors in some packages inside bioconductor. Overall I expected much more from this course and I cannot recommend it to anyone. | real life genomic questions, but all | Quizz | questions were outstandingly difficult, because of | Positive | 0.69 | -0.5 | 0.79 | 1.04 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | There are two frustrations with this iteration of the series. One: the quiz questions are often opaquely worded. Instead of being tested on the material just learned, it seemed like the objective was to learn to decode test questions. 2 and the most glaring omission, was that when students are asked to provide functions, only some are provided with a follow up test to ensure the function is working properly. If the output is syntactically correct but provides incorrect output then you're moving forward blindly after that. Then add the quiz questions from problem One above, and you're just wasting your time after that and building up frustration. Validating your code as you move along seems like a pretty rudimentary process to impart to students and when the teachers don't practice it themselves, there are bound to be problems. I like the intent of the course, and considering my outsider background to computer science, the mathematics etc, I did learn a fair bit. Not enough to justify the increasing frustration I was feeling toward the end of this course. I have no intention of taking any more at this point, not from these authors. | iteration of the series. One: the | Quizz | questions are often opaquely worded. Instead | Positive | 0.79 | -0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | There are two frustrations with this iteration of the series. One: the quiz questions are often opaquely worded. Instead of being tested on the material just learned, it seemed like the objective was to learn to decode test questions. 2 and the most glaring omission, was that when students are asked to provide functions, only some are provided with a follow up test to ensure the function is working properly. If the output is syntactically correct but provides incorrect output then you're moving forward blindly after that. Then add the quiz questions from problem One above, and you're just wasting your time after that and building up frustration. Validating your code as you move along seems like a pretty rudimentary process to impart to students and when the teachers don't practice it themselves, there are bound to be problems. I like the intent of the course, and considering my outsider background to computer science, the mathematics etc, I did learn a fair bit. Not enough to justify the increasing frustration I was feeling toward the end of this course. I have no intention of taking any more at this point, not from these authors. | blindly after that. Then add the | Quizz | questions from problem One above, and | Negative | -0.64 | -0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent combination of conceptual and practical quizzes. Providing the presentation slides is a great note-taking aid, as well as use of "ride-along" notebooks. The progressive use of the same dataset throughout the modules greatly aided focus on learning the algorithms. | Excellent combination of conceptual and practical | Quizz | Providing the presentation slides is a | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good class, But it would be much better if the quiz is open to those who doesn't pay. | would be much better if the | Quizz | is open to those who doesn't | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course offers great background instruction on Machine Learning and I would give it 5 stars except for the following: First, there doesn't seem to be any moderation of the session discussions except for help from other students. This was worth a -2 star penalty. This and the lack of any review of linear algebra and vectorized solutions, I think, is giving some students the impression that they should be coding loops in their functions to build and solve ML models. Next, I am auditing the course, and this is the first course where I was not able to submit quizzes. Therefore, I can only guess at my solutions. This was worth a -1 star penalty. UPDATE: not being able to submit quizzes is a "feature" of the new Coursera platform. I never did get an answer from the discussion forums, but I see the same problem in other Coursera courses I am taking. However, I still think the course is worth taking, so I added back a star. This is the second ML course I have taken. The first was from Stanford ML course which was very specific to implementation in the Octave language. I got a lot more background information from this course, and I think it is well taught. Just wish there were more moderators that were actively watching the discussion list. | I was not able to submit | Quizz | Therefore, I can only guess at | Negative | -0.95 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course offers great background instruction on Machine Learning and I would give it 5 stars except for the following: First, there doesn't seem to be any moderation of the session discussions except for help from other students. This was worth a -2 star penalty. This and the lack of any review of linear algebra and vectorized solutions, I think, is giving some students the impression that they should be coding loops in their functions to build and solve ML models. Next, I am auditing the course, and this is the first course where I was not able to submit quizzes. Therefore, I can only guess at my solutions. This was worth a -1 star penalty. UPDATE: not being able to submit quizzes is a "feature" of the new Coursera platform. I never did get an answer from the discussion forums, but I see the same problem in other Coursera courses I am taking. However, I still think the course is worth taking, so I added back a star. This is the second ML course I have taken. The first was from Stanford ML course which was very specific to implementation in the Octave language. I got a lot more background information from this course, and I think it is well taught. Just wish there were more moderators that were actively watching the discussion list. | UPDATE: not being able to submit | Quizz | is a " feature" of the | Negative | -0.65 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Really good course. Provides basic theoretical and hands on knowledge in the regression. Step by step programming quiz some times not demonstrate enough best practices or conceptual ideas. For example I would expect that if at step 1 we asked to assess performance based on single feature then at step 2 based on several features and compare results. But in most of the cases such comparison not proposed and results not explained. In addition it is not always clear why prediction accuracy better or worse. | the regression. Step by step programming | Quizz | some times not demonstrate enough best | Positive | 0.63 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This was a deep dive into all things regression and I guess having a background in mathematics helped out a lot with following the material. However, I wish there was a better distribution of quizzes and assignments throughout the weekly lessons because they seemed to all come during the end of the lesson. All in all this was a very good course and I wish that I would have taken a similar course during my undergrad. | there was a better distribution of | Quizz | and assignments throughout the weekly lessons | Negative | -0.85 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This is an amazing and brilliant course for machine learning. If you've done Andrew Ng's course, most of this material will feel familiar, but definitely has a lot more detail. Each sub-topic under regression is taken with a decent level of detail, with sufficient quiz and assignment questions to drill important concepts into your head. The lectures are lucid and concise, even the optional ones that cover more advanced concepts of the underlying math. As an aside, I would like to clarify to any reader that, when they say you can use other tools, they aren't being a 100% honest. After a few assignments of using Scala and R, I quickly realized that using their iPython notebooks is the simplest and most straightforward way of clearing this course. Eventually, the assignments are such that using any other tool can cause a lot of strife. Brilliant course. Looking forward to the next one. | decent level of detail, with sufficient | Quizz | and assignment questions to drill important | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good introduction to linear regression. The quizzes are moderately difficult, and can be somewhat time consuming. There is a lot of depth to this topic, and tho this course touches on a lot of it, it won't be enough to get a very thorough understanding. In general I'm really glad I took this course | Good introduction to linear regression. The | Quizz | are moderately difficult, and can be | Positive | 0.74 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | An excellent and quite extensive foray into regression analyses from single-variable linear regression to nearest-neighbor and kernel regression techniques, including how to use gradient vs. coordinate descent for optimization and proper L1 and L2 regularization methods. The lecture slides have some questionable pedagogical and aesthetic qualities, and they could use some more polish from someone who specializes in teaching presentation methods, but the meat of the course comes from its quizzes and programming assignments, which are well split between practical use (via Graphlab Create and SFrame) and a nuts-and-bolts assignment that have you implement these methods from scratch. An extremely valuable course for someone who wants to use these for a data science application but also wants to understand the mathematics and statistics behind them to an appreciable degree. | of the course comes from its | Quizz | and programming assignments, which are well | Positive | 0.91 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This module is very rich in pratical assignments, as well as quizzes to force you to understand what you are doing. Everything is really well balanced, and all the materials are very complete. Is clear the passion from the tutors and teachers in this course. This really gives you the necessary will to proceed, and don't give up, even when things get pretty hard. | in pratical assignments, as well as | Quizz | to force you to understand what | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Very, very good course, high-quality teaching, and well-developed quizzes and assignments. The course is challenging enough to feel motivated and satisfied when finishing a week's work, but not so challenging as to scare people (or me, at least) away. I hope (and trust) that you keep up the good work in the courses to come. If there was one thing I could change, it would be to include a discussion of statistical significance/inference (as suggested by Emily towards the end). It is unclear now how that can be analyzed in the Graphlab environment, even though it is a very important topic for practical purposes. | good course, high-quality teaching, and well-developed | Quizz | and assignments. The course is challenging | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Can't praise enough! This IS THE COURSE for regression. Cannot believe I didn't stumble upon it earlier enough. Great Specialization, Great Course, Great Professors, Great thought provoking Quizzes and assignments, helpful mentors and more important that any of the above, amazing comprehensive content covering each and every topic from simple linear regression to feature selection and going all the way to kNN Regression. An enjoyable and great learning experience. Hope to carry on the same level of enthusiasm through the rest of the specialization. Thank You Emily, Carlos, Johan (mentor) and rest of my classmates. And of course, Thank You Coursera. | Course, Great Professors, Great thought provoking | Quizz | and assignments, helpful mentors and more | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | great course, I learned a lot. Videos, slides, quiz, programming exercises, a lot of fun. | I learned a lot. Videos, slides, | Quizz | programming exercises, a lot of fun. | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course was well structured and well executed. I thoroughly enjoyed and was challenged by the material in the course. I appreciated the assignment/quiz approach to deal with such dense topics. I can see where people who have backgrounds in a number of the topics discussed throughout the course could feel there was too much hand holding, but I found the level of hints/help in the assignments were at the right level for me to work through & gain deeper understanding for the material presented. My one criticism of the course stems from the denseness of the material. I believe there is an opportunity to introduce more quizzes after various sections within each module. It would be best to make these quizzes optional in order not to turn off more advance students, but I believe it would be beneficial for those students who do not have much, or any, experience in these topics to have more opportunities to test and gain deeper understanding in the material just covered. Overall, solid course! | is an opportunity to introduce more | Quizz | after various sections within each module. | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This course was well structured and well executed. I thoroughly enjoyed and was challenged by the material in the course. I appreciated the assignment/quiz approach to deal with such dense topics. I can see where people who have backgrounds in a number of the topics discussed throughout the course could feel there was too much hand holding, but I found the level of hints/help in the assignments were at the right level for me to work through & gain deeper understanding for the material presented. My one criticism of the course stems from the denseness of the material. I believe there is an opportunity to introduce more quizzes after various sections within each module. It would be best to make these quizzes optional in order not to turn off more advance students, but I believe it would be beneficial for those students who do not have much, or any, experience in these topics to have more opportunities to test and gain deeper understanding in the material just covered. Overall, solid course! | would be best to make these | Quizz | optional in order not to turn | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | This gives a nice survey of the techniques and approaches of Linear Regression. Lectures are structured well, and mathematical derivations are provided as optional lectures. Each week has a quiz that goes over the material, as well as programming assignments that are meant to provide a higher level understanding via Dato's GraphLab Create, as well as lower level understanding with Numpy. I am dropping a star because some portions of the programming exercises seemed to be contrived. | optional lectures. Each week has a | Quizz | that goes over the material, as | Positive | 0.68 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| mxdq5kIJEeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Wonderful lectures and good assignments. Very, very clear presentations. Minor drawbacks: there's no assistance available for the assignments (which can be quite difficult). The quizzes require sometimes information that is not directly available in the video lectures. Note that it takes more hrs per week than mentioned (but it's worthwhile!). | (which can be quite difficult). The | Quizz | require sometimes information that is not | Positive | 0.71 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.09 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Opening the quizes and the internal acreditation for free should be a most for such a good course like this. Its a shame that "non premium" users have access to only the video material. | Opening the | Quizz | and the internal acreditation for free | Negative | -0.76 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 0.97 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Super costly. The course needs to make at least some of the quizes available for the free users | make at least some of the | Quizz | available for the free users | Negative | -0.86 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 0.97 |
| myQGkjlZEeWJaxK5AT4frw | Great insights, very useful contents. The assignments are a good addition to the lectures & quizzes - it makes it more interactive and "forces" you to think about the content more deeply and in relation to your own experiences. Geoffrey (The Netherlands) | good addition to the lectures & | Quizz | - it makes it more interactive | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 0.97 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Excellent quality, loved the quizzes and graded assignments, completely worth the time and money! Highly recommend! | Excellent quality, loved the | Quizz | and graded assignments, completely worth the | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.21 | 1.23 |
| nA4RUW01EeW8nRIpKnwp7Q | Update: As I proceed to wk 5, I know why there are some complaint on Dynamic programming, Reduced to 2 stars. Lectures are totally useless for the assignment, The course is really good until week 4 when it deteriorates very quick. No matter how many times I re-watch the lecture, I can't understand much. I ended up using wikipedia for the quiz instead :P I can't use much of the course forum since there are too many posts there and it keep crashing my chrome. This course gets my 3 stars from the first 3 weeks alone, otherwise it gonna be 0-2 stars. | ended up using wikipedia for the | Quizz | instead :P I can't use much | Negative | -0.93 | -0.5 | 1.21 | 1.23 |
| NDBJAUWDEeWbNhIvIryYow | This is a fantastic course about the basics of Investment Management. While it is an introductory course, it does not shy away from some basic maths and includes some very interesting and instructive spreadsheet exercises. The quality of the presentations, subtitles and slides is outstanding. The quizzes are challenging but always within the content of the lectures. I strongly recommend this course to anybody interested in investment management who is not afraid of some basic maths. Moreover, I strongly encourage the team, that organised this MOOC, to create more specialized and in depth courses, maybe even a Specialization. | subtitles and slides is outstanding. The | Quizz | are challenging but always within the | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.16 | 1.17 |
| NDBJAUWDEeWbNhIvIryYow | The videos did cover the basic theories behind all the methods for portfolio management however they were just basic theories with no explanation on how to practically implement them and then asking us who only understand the theories from the videos to suddenly try to solve the calculation quizzes especially those excel calculations without any practice on how to implement them beforehand. Besides the videos only showed the formulas with no example at all! Very disappointed with the course... This course is not recommended for those who have zero or little experience in the field.. | suddenly try to solve the calculation | Quizz | especially those excel calculations without any | Negative | -0.78 | -0.5 | 1.16 | 1.17 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The course comes with great explanation but the graded assignments sometimes seem pointless as they look irrelevant to the topic, There are unnecessary questions asked in quizzes i.e whether you have completed your assignment or not. These sort of questions never evaluate what we have accomplished | There are unnecessary questions asked in | Quizz | i. e whether you have completed | Negative | -0.81 | 0.5 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great introduction to Java. Gives you an opportunity to play with several different libraries from the start, rather than learning the basics with just text input and output like most courses, which is really cool. No peer review, just quiz questions that can only be answered if the assignment is completed correctly. The assignments are therefore not particularly challenging -- you get out of this class what you put in! | really cool. No peer review, just | Quizz | questions that can only be answered | Negative | -0.83 | 0.5 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Comprehensive, enough amount of quizes and suitable assignment to ensure your understanding and give you enough practice. Nicely planned. I have really benefited from it. | Comprehensive, enough amount of | Quizz | and suitable assignment to ensure your | Positive | 0.82 | 1.0 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This course was a really comprehensive package explaining all the basic concepts of Object Oriented Programming . The instructors clearly explains the concepts of inheritance , polymorphism , searching , sorting etc. relating it as much as possible to real world examples. The concept challenge questions clearly helps you to understand the subtle nuances that the instructor wants to explain . The quiz are easy .The only thing that i found hard was to complete was the final assignment as i had minimal programming experience with data structures but if you stick to it , you will definitely make it , just like me :) | instructor wants to explain . The | Quizz | are easy . The only thing | Negative | -0.95 | 1.0 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | This is definitely one of the best courses I have taken. The presentations, resources, and projects are very creative and well designed. The "what do you want to cover next" quizzes tempt you to try things on your own before looking for help, which is a nice teaser. The only reason I give it 4/5 is that a few of the project instructions were too vague to figure out what they were asking for (i.e. without asking). | do you want to cover next" | Quizz | tempt you to try things on | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good course, ideal for the first half of a second course in computer science. A little java experience is recommended buy you'll probably be ok if you have program in a statically type programming language before because you can pick up java very quickly. The lectures are very good, I think that the teachers are excellent expositors but I feel that they could be more detailed. The project is about representing earthquakes in a map and you are always increasing the complexity. Finally you need to add your own extension which I found an excellent opportunity to test your imagination and your capacity to create new things. The only cons of the course for me is the way assignments are evaluated. I think it has to do with the fact that they are interactive. You have to answers questions in a Quiz related to the week content and the project. But the are not very demanding, therefore they do not reflect how much you really know. In general I recommend taking this course if you are in self study journey in computer science, even more the specialization start to get more interesting and demanding in the follow up courses, more complete and detailed. | have to answers questions in a | Quizz | related to the week content and | Positive | 0.67 | 0.5 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| NFiJtRnpEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | It needs project based exams, not quizzes. These project exams should be a combination of automated programming tasks, like the kind you find on HackerRank or Codeforces and peer assessment based projects that asks students to evaluate the readability of each others code. As it currently stands, this course is a joke. | It needs project based exams, not | Quizz | These project exams should be a | Negative | -0.83 | -1.0 | 0.87 | 1.08 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I really enjoyed this course, it was very informative. My only complaint is that on quiz questions that included example code, sometimes the ends of lines were cut off. I had to copy and paste them into an editor to read the entire thing. | My only complaint is that on | Quizz | questions that included example code, sometimes | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course was very nicely organized for absolute beginners. I had done Web Development a long time back and was completely new to HTML5. Listening to the Video lectures and referring the suggested textbook "Missing Link An Introduction to Web Development and Programming" was very helpful. The quizzes were tricky. I recommend this course to anyone who is completely new to web development and who likes to learn the concepts and best practices in coding. | and Programming" was very helpful. The | Quizz | were tricky. I recommend this course | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I enjoyed the pace of this class however, I was not too keen on the way code is graded, e.g. for the final project of the 3rd week, although my code validated and the resulting page was identical to the instructor's mockup, it was still marked incorrect in the quiz and there was no way to determine exactly what the issue was. There has to be a better way to grade coding assignments. | was still marked incorrect in the | Quizz | and there was no way to | Negative | -0.98 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | instructor was really great and the | Quizz | were perfect. The only thing I | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | the final project now has additional | Quizz | (related to the project) and even | Negative | -0.72 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | This is the best course for a complete beginner. The presentation of the course material is very friendly, the instructor was really great and the quizzes were perfect. The only thing I would like to suggest is adding more coding exercises. But as it stands now, it is still fantastic! I see some people have complained about the final project auto-grader of this course. But you should know that the final project now has additional quizzes (related to the project) and even though the auto-grader sometimes makes mistakes, you can compensate that by answering the project quizzes correctly. If you are a beginner in web development, "Introduction to HTML5" is the best start you can possibly have. Most importantly this course will give you the confidence to take more advanced courses in future. | compensate that by answering the project | Quizz | correctly. If you are a beginner | Negative | -0.67 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | More interactive assignments using the parser would have been great. As it stands, the quizzes had mostly relevant content, but the lessons were anything but engaging. Having Colleen talk at the camera for 5-12 minutes per video got tedious really quick. | been great. As it stands, the | Quizz | had mostly relevant content, but the | Positive | 0.94 | -0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The caliber of questions in the quizzes is quite advanced. I would be fine with that, as the challenge of writing correct html5 is a good challenge. However much of these questions were not covered in the lectures or the required and optional reading. Learning the correct html tag syntax is not intuitive--one has to be shown examples. If no examples have been covered, how can a quiz-taker be expected to create the proper tags? This strikes me as bad pedagogy. In order to answer the questions and prepare the requested page of html tags, it became necessary for a beginner such as me to research elsewhere in order to answer the questions. In that case, I began wondering why I was taking this course, rather than just reviewing the many free html5 explanations on the Internet. Further the very general response to the submitted page of html gives me no help when I am simply told something isn't right and I should review the lessons--again. I expected better feedback. I found this course to be fascinating from the lecture point of view, but "abusive" in terms of quiz expectations. I was going to take the CSS3 course from the series, but now I plan on looking for this education elsewhere. | The caliber of questions in the | Quizz | is quite advanced. I would be | Positive | 0.62 | -0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The caliber of questions in the quizzes is quite advanced. I would be fine with that, as the challenge of writing correct html5 is a good challenge. However much of these questions were not covered in the lectures or the required and optional reading. Learning the correct html tag syntax is not intuitive--one has to be shown examples. If no examples have been covered, how can a quiz-taker be expected to create the proper tags? This strikes me as bad pedagogy. In order to answer the questions and prepare the requested page of html tags, it became necessary for a beginner such as me to research elsewhere in order to answer the questions. In that case, I began wondering why I was taking this course, rather than just reviewing the many free html5 explanations on the Internet. Further the very general response to the submitted page of html gives me no help when I am simply told something isn't right and I should review the lessons--again. I expected better feedback. I found this course to be fascinating from the lecture point of view, but "abusive" in terms of quiz expectations. I was going to take the CSS3 course from the series, but now I plan on looking for this education elsewhere. | but " abusive" in terms of | Quizz | expectations. I was going to take | Negative | -0.81 | -0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Just finished the final quiz! Feeling so great! I really love this course cause I've learned a lot about HTML. Also, the Instructor put a lot of emphasis on accessibility, which I think is really important. One thing a little bit frustrating, though, the codes in the quizzes look like mess when viewed on my phone and it really gave me a lot of trouble. Perhaps this courser would offer better support for mobile phones? | Just finished the final | Quizz | Feeling so great! I really love | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Just finished the final quiz! Feeling so great! I really love this course cause I've learned a lot about HTML. Also, the Instructor put a lot of emphasis on accessibility, which I think is really important. One thing a little bit frustrating, though, the codes in the quizzes look like mess when viewed on my phone and it really gave me a lot of trouble. Perhaps this courser would offer better support for mobile phones? | frustrating, though, the codes in the | Quizz | look like mess when viewed on | Negative | -0.94 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | I'd give it a 3.5, but it's not possible so I'm leaning more towards a 4 than a 3. The most positive thing about the course was Prof. van Lent who really knows her stuff. She also has a calm, soothing manner of explaining things and moves with it at the right pace. The content was easy to follow and quizzes were useful. Final assignment was messed up and they really should fix that, but the additional eight questions were basically a transcript of the code itself, and if you did your own code, you shouldn't have had any problem distinguishing the bad code from the good one. Extra stuff for those who successfully finished the course was a nice touch. The real downside of it all was the 'staff'. I got my question answered nine days after I posted it, when I had already finished. I've also seen some rude and condescending yet sparse answers to other students. Similar (but worse) things happen in CSS3 course as well. I don't know who those people are and how they got their jobs, but they should be replaced. Or sent to professional conduct and time management class. | content was easy to follow and | Quizz | were useful. Final assignment was messed | Positive | 0.97 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Excellent course with in depth explanation and good quizzes! | with in depth explanation and good | Quizz | | Negative | -0.69 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | If there had been a working autograder for the last final project this course would have been worth it somehow. What does that mean? - The lectures provided valuable information. - The quizzes generally made sense (in relation to the lectures). - Learning how to code wasn't really possible. Why is that? - There is only one programming assignment. - The autograder doesn't give any feedback at all why resp. where things go wrong. That's everything but good style (for software as well as for learning). - Code snippets can't be tested individually. That's very bad behavior in programming. - At the end working code that meets the teached rules is marked as wrong. You are lost without any clue. So probably you can learn something. Unfortunately you can't possibly finish the course with a feeling of success. | lectures provided valuable information. - The | Quizz | generally made sense (in relation to | Positive | 0.71 | -0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Clear and very interesting. But I don't think this course is adapted for people who never heard about coding. I liked you speak about accessibility and enjoyed making the quizz. Congrats ! | about accessibility and enjoyed making the | Quizz | Congrats ! | Positive | 0.86 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The good: This course really shows how to code in the 'right' way both syntax and semantics, so the theory is covered better than in other courses. There are good explanations on how to host your site, whch is not less important than learning coding. The bad: More examples and practice are needed, it's hard to get everything so quickly. I had some initial background so i handeld that ok, but for total newbies it might be too frustrating. The final assignment should be changed imo to peer review, the quiz is not the right way to do it imo. Thanks, learned alot. | changed imo to peer review, the | Quizz | is not the right way to | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Terrible lectures and quizes | Terrible lectures and | Quizz | | Negative | -0.85 | -1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating. | impossible to pass. There was a | Quizz | that would allow you to pass | Negative | -0.96 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating. | I got it wrong on the | Quizz | three times and it never did | Positive | 0.81 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | It was a very good course. I understood everything. My only complaint is that the tests questions were repetitive and so it would be easy to cheat on a second or third attempt and also the final quiz should have been more about writing your own code. I think what should have been tested was the end product by the autograder rather than the exact code. I'm not sure how that would work but it would result in a more precise grade rather than the 87.5% everyone gets and also help the student write his/her own code rather than proofreading and selecting others. I did thoroughly enjoy the course and am looking forward to Course two of the series on CSS3. | third attempt and also the final | Quizz | should have been more about writing | Negative | -0.77 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | some quizzes would not work on my mobile and the final test was VERY hard. But overall a | some | Quizz | would not work on my mobile | Negative | -0.86 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Great videos. Teacher awesome. But the course needs, in order to be better, more practical activities and i got a little bit upset when I worked hard in final project and later I saw that it´s not necessary at all.....Instead, I should just did a final quiz. | I should just did a final | Quizz | | Negative | -0.72 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Video Lectures are good. Quiz taking method is Great. Liked. Thanks for the course. | Video Lectures are good. | Quizz | taking method is Great. Liked. Thanks | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Lectures are great. Colleen sounds very amiable. She has great tips. Downside: You're only required to do some coding for the final project. I think this course would be better if they'll add an in-browser editor so students could play with code after a lecture. Yes, I do play with code after the lecture to get around it, but I think the way the lectures are presented tempt the students not to. So any additional prompts such as in-browser editor - for in-lecture quizzes - definitely will help. | as in-browser editor - for in-lecture | Quizz | - definitely will help. | Positive | 0.79 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Overall I learned a lot. The course covered the topic of HTML 5 and the concepts behind the internet (hosting, protocols, DNS, etc.) I like that it was purely quiz/project based and no grading was done as peer review. However, occasionally (about 1/20) some of the quiz problems were just plain wrong. Also, the final project was a bit too strict and needed more fuzzy logic for the parser. One could produce visually identical and 100% valid results and still not get a perfect score. That seems a bit flawed to me. However, if you really want to labor on it, you can just give the quiz what it wants and eventually get a full score. All-in-all, I would recommend the course. | occasionally (about 1/20) some of the | Quizz | problems were just plain wrong. Also, | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Overall I learned a lot. The course covered the topic of HTML 5 and the concepts behind the internet (hosting, protocols, DNS, etc.) I like that it was purely quiz/project based and no grading was done as peer review. However, occasionally (about 1/20) some of the quiz problems were just plain wrong. Also, the final project was a bit too strict and needed more fuzzy logic for the parser. One could produce visually identical and 100% valid results and still not get a perfect score. That seems a bit flawed to me. However, if you really want to labor on it, you can just give the quiz what it wants and eventually get a full score. All-in-all, I would recommend the course. | it, you can just give the | Quizz | what it wants and eventually get | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | The course is very good. It is not so easy to pass the quizes but it does get you hooked on HTML | not so easy to pass the | Quizz | but it does get you hooked | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | 'Introduction to HTML5' course is a very general introduction to HTML5 for beginners. The professor doesn't assume you know anything about Web development or even how files are uploaded to a host website. The course covers a brief history of the Web, basic HTML5 elements, URL terminology, Accessibility, Semantics, and basic FTP & Web hosting software like C-Panel. Forms and other advanced topics are not covered. The class is presented in a laid back style and uses non-technical language which is easy to understand. The quality of the video and audio are excellent. Supplemental books (pdf) and links to Youtube videos are provided and are useful. The duration of some of the lectures seemed too long, even when using 2X playback speed. With some of the quizzes, the professor expected you to read her mind and were worded in a subjective manner. The Accessibility section seemed a little too preachy for me. Also, the final project was convoluted and the instructions were vague. The final project really ended up being a 9 or 10 question quiz that gave you hints on how to code the final project. In summary, take this course if you are a complete beginner. Otherwise, you won't learn much if you have more than 2 months of experience in front end Web development. | being a 9 or 10 question | Quizz | that gave you hints on how | Positive | 0.92 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| nQ5d7TbQEeWW9BKhJ4xW0Q | Very good course but more assignments should be included except the quizzes .... | assignments should be included except the | Quizz | . . . . | Negative | -0.76 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.1 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Lots of readings! Would have loved a more engaging format. Also found the content slightly ambiguous, you might have to do some trial and error and might be surprised at the answers in the quiz. | surprised at the answers in the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.79 | -0.5 | 0.95 | 1.15 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Not a bad course, generally learnt a lot of interesting facts about market crashes. Behavioural biases discussed are not something new that you can't figure them out on your own, but giving names to them makes it quite useful to remember and recall in future situations. The major problem with this course is the fact that many quiz questions are tricky. Most of biases aren't discussed well in lectures, so you need to do a bit of research. But even then, they overlap a lot, so some questions have several answers and it is difficult to choose. However, it makes you think at least. | course is the fact that many | Quizz | questions are tricky. Most of biases | Positive | 0.77 | 0.5 | 0.95 | 1.15 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | another website (and that's in the | Quizz | as well). It seems like very | Negative | -0.83 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.15 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | online" course. Even the answers to | Quizz | seemed extremely vague (it often felt | Negative | -0.7 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.15 |
| NSxhuc9cEeWczg7kSY_tVQ | Duke.... Coursera... guys, come on! I'd like to contrast this with the Wharton Business Analytics specialization that I'm completing. It was like night and day. I mean, professors in that course are presenting their own research! Cade Massey presents research he did with Dick Thaler! None of that happens here. The information shared doesn't even flow smoothly. This course relies mainly on PDF slides (if I wanted to read, I would've bought a book). At one point, it even links to 6 articles on another website (and that's in the quiz as well). It seems like very little effort was put into this online class by the professors. The slides themselves seemed scatter-brained, several times asking questions that are never even answered. It was almost as if someone took already prepared slides from a course and just kind of mashed them with a very little bit of video to make an "online" course. Even the answers to quizzes seemed extremely vague (it often felt like there were several right answers... or none -- to me, this is sloppy quiz writing). I honestly expected better from both Coursera and Duke! The only redeeming part about this course is that behavioral economics is honestly compelling, despite the shortcomings pointed out. | -- to me, this is sloppy | Quizz | writing). I honestly expected better from | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.95 | 1.15 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | This class was well done. The material was clearly explained. The quizzes and final project were relevant and served to bring all the material together into a c | The material was clearly explained. The | Quizz | and final project were relevant and | Negative | -0.97 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I thought the course was really interesting and well taught. I think the quizzes and final assignment could be a little tougher but I understand there is a larger Kapstone project for the specialization. I really liked the additional resources, articles and videos provided and have added many of the articles and books to my reading list. | and well taught. I think the | Quizz | and final assignment could be a | Positive | 0.72 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | I had rated this course 4 star earlier but, I am downgrading it to 2 star now as the course managers - coursera + CBS seem to have abandoned the coursera while the program is still running and being charged upwards of hundreds of dollars. The final peer assignment date has passed by close to 2 weeks and the grading process is not completed, neither there is any communication from course managers about the same. Very disappointing from Coursera and CBS. For free, the course may be still useful as early introduction to strategy but as paid course, refrain for the time being. My earlier review below. ----- Delivery of the course - presentation, videos, sequencing and articles for each video are very well organized and executed. Referring cases studies is good as well. However, the material seems simplified and is very much a basic course and not intermediate or advanced course. Additionally, the quizzes are very simple and have ample room to increase the difficulty level in order to make the course more challenging. | intermediate or advanced course. Additionally, the | Quizz | are very simple and have ample | Positive | 0.97 | -0.5 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Clear types of strategic approach. A good quiz to reinforce the learning Short and sweet with real examples. | types of strategic approach. A good | Quizz | to reinforce the learning Short and | Positive | 0.64 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | Well structured and presented (videos) with the right amount of support information. Clear quizzes consistent with each module. | right amount of support information. Clear | Quizz | consistent with each module. | Positive | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | A very interesting and useful course. I took it as a supplement to my studies at my B-school. It has helped clarify many concepts and given me applicable tools. Loved the lectures,quizzes and the Capstone project. I highly recommend this course to anyone who wants to learn about Strategy at its core. Thank you Professor Robert Austin! Your teaching methods are very different from what I have here in India, The examples you gave throughout the course were very apt and aided my greatly. | me applicable tools. Loved the lectures, | Quizz | and the Capstone project. I highly | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| oC5XlyT_EeWs4gorU6Q1Yw | The course is very interesting but there is a problem with the quizzes, it doesn't accept correct questions. If needed I can provide a screen shot of the problem in one of the quizzes. Hope that all this will be fixed and I'll be able to take the course again. | there is a problem with the | Quizz | it doesn't accept correct questions. If | Negative | -0.88 | -1.0 | 1.0 | 1.19 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | This course covered a broad swath of diverse material in an admirably compact form. The instructor was surprisingly passionate! about the topic, but once I got used to his style I could see it was because he was really invested in this type of work and really invested in getting us to understand it. Comprehension quizzes along with the lectures would have been nice to help absorb all the new vocabulary. There was also a creative use of the Coursera system to get us to do actual data gathering and coding (at least at a beginning level) on our own. As for the material, I felt like I was getting to see a secret world that everyone else around me already somehow knew about. As I am new to social science, I wondered how to find out about this secret arsenal of tools for dealing with interview and ethnography data that always seem to be referred to but never explained. Well, here they are! And now I have them too! Much appreciated. | getting us to understand it. Comprehension | Quizz | along with the lectures would have | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 1.03 |
| OmgIw0C2EeWZtA4u62x6lQ | Engaging and broad-based course on qualitative research methods. Real world assignments were required, so there was a considerable commitment, which of course led to a sound learning experience. Generally I prefer courses with multiple lecturers, but the lecturer here was entertaining and interesting to watch, and very committed to ensuring that we learnt from the course. Also I noted that when students raised issues about the quizzes or assignments they were dealt with. Thanks Coursera and University of Amsterdam. | when students raised issues about the | Quizz | or assignments they were dealt with. | Negative | -0.71 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 1.03 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | I am two weeks into the course and really like it. The ideas and concepts mentioned are quite profound. And hope to apply them soon enough in both my personal and professional life. One additional thing which would really like seeing in the course is use of questions just to ascertain our mastery over concepts. Something like the other course which I am taking concurrently -- Think again: How to understand arguments. Where intermediate quizzes ensures that learners are understanding what the intention is followed by 'Share your thoughts' questions to express your views and discuss specific course material with other learners. I feel this mix of quizzes and sharing really helps in learning the course. | How to understand arguments. Where intermediate | Quizz | ensures that learners are understanding what | Positive | 0.64 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.87 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | I am two weeks into the course and really like it. The ideas and concepts mentioned are quite profound. And hope to apply them soon enough in both my personal and professional life. One additional thing which would really like seeing in the course is use of questions just to ascertain our mastery over concepts. Something like the other course which I am taking concurrently -- Think again: How to understand arguments. Where intermediate quizzes ensures that learners are understanding what the intention is followed by 'Share your thoughts' questions to express your views and discuss specific course material with other learners. I feel this mix of quizzes and sharing really helps in learning the course. | learners. I feel this mix of | Quizz | and sharing really helps in learning | Positive | 0.83 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.87 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Content is fairly good with weak story line and connection across the various modules. Also the lack of in session quiz modules or weekly quiz module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. It's also possible that i was expecting a lot from a course on design thinking and what it turned out to be was just a scratching of the surface of what the definition of Design Thinking is all about. Having read numerous books on Lean Thinking, Agile development, Minimum Viable Propositions, etc. I was really expecting a solid rigorous approach to the world of design thinking. This course let me down and I just managed to scrape through at the end...almost gave up. | Also the lack of in session | Quizz | modules or weekly quiz module to | Negative | -0.93 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 0.87 |
| opCIcU3SEeWeiwqPB940Pw | Content is fairly good with weak story line and connection across the various modules. Also the lack of in session quiz modules or weekly quiz module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. It's also possible that i was expecting a lot from a course on design thinking and what it turned out to be was just a scratching of the surface of what the definition of Design Thinking is all about. Having read numerous books on Lean Thinking, Agile development, Minimum Viable Propositions, etc. I was really expecting a solid rigorous approach to the world of design thinking. This course let me down and I just managed to scrape through at the end...almost gave up. | in session quiz modules or weekly | Quizz | module to re-inforce learning is disappointing. | Negative | -0.81 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 0.87 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Great Course ! Absolutely covers Python Data Structure, it is really helpful for me. If you want to master on python data structure you can take this course. All the quiz and assignments are really amazing. I am really thankful to the professor Dr-Chuck :) . | can take this course. All the | Quizz | and assignments are really amazing. I | Positive | 0.96 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Nice job ! However some of the important points have been skipped and focus has been limited at times.The best part of the course were the lab assignments.Hope quizzes were better in standard. | course were the lab assignments. Hope | Quizz | were better in standard. | Negative | -0.87 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The lectures were good and to the point. I learned all the basics and the differences between data structures. The quizzes were quite good, with some nice traps set in them. The programming assignments supported the lectures well, though I felt there could've been more of them (perhaps just as ungraded bonus problems). | the differences between data structures. The | Quizz | were quite good, with some nice | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very good course to understand about the data structures in Python. Supported by nice quiz and thought provoking assignments. Really enjoyed the course and proud of myself in completing this course successfully. Would strongly recommend this course to aspiring Python programmers. | structures in Python. Supported by nice | Quizz | and thought provoking assignments. Really enjoyed | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | A very clear explanation and perfectly designed quizzes and assignments. | very clear explanation and perfectly designed | Quizz | and assignments. | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | An excellent course overall. Dr. Chuck is great - very interesting to following during the video lectures. The quizzes and exercises are all challenging but not to the point where you cannot figure out what to do. | following during the video lectures. The | Quizz | and exercises are all challenging but | Negative | -0.66 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | The book really gave more details about the individual chapters. Hence it was easy to do the assignments and quizzes without watching the videos. I recommend that specializations should follow this trend, so students who find it difficult to access Internet can use the book as a guide. More examples are needed to understand the concepts especially Tuples and DIctionary | easy to do the assignments and | Quizz | without watching the videos. I recommend | Positive | 0.92 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Excellent for beginners. Many a thanks to Dr Chuck, boy he really makes it easier to learn. Quiz and Assignment reiterates the slides taking out revision pain. Personally I liked the extra videos and Dr Chuck singing "I got my Mojo.." ya.. | really makes it easier to learn. | Quizz | and Assignment reiterates the slides taking | Positive | 0.89 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | This was a good course, the lecturer is excellent. My only complaint was that the quizzes and assignments were not challenging enough. There should be some more difficult assignments and problems included in this course. | My only complaint was that the | Quizz | and assignments were not challenging enough. | Positive | 0.99 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Very helpful course and nice assignments and quizzes. Teaching in a very easy to understand way. Thanks Dr. | helpful course and nice assignments and | Quizz | Teaching in a very easy to | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | I t is a great, course, quiz are not hard but they provoke an important questioning and are part of the learning process. Assignments are more interesting every week and strike the most important topics of the week while using remembering a lot of the past concepts. It will be great of after the course is finish the student could download the homework. | I t is a great, course, | Quizz | are not hard but they provoke | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| P--h6zpNEeWYbg7p2_3OHQ | Fabulous course. The lectures are good. Quizzes and assignments have started to be, applying what you've "learned", not just regurgitation. Very nice. The bonus material show how the different technologies are related and the genesis of many of them by individuals who participated in then. Very cool. Thanks much. It was most enjoyable. I also like that you can move at your own pace. If you're new to the profession, a quick learner or re-tooling, it's move as fast or as slow as you want. This is been very helpful for myself. I'm retooling and have become a "college" student again. Great fun. Thanks much!! | Fabulous course. The lectures are good. | Quizz | and assignments have started to be, | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 1.18 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | It's a good course. It is very simple. It's just exposition and quizzes. Great for beginners. | very simple. It's just exposition and | Quizz | Great for beginners. | Positive | 0.76 | 0.0 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | This course gives a concise intro to the basics of project management, largely based on PMI PMBOK guide. The course is useful to get acquainted with or refresh knowledge on project management principles. It would be nice if auditing students could also do the quizzes (even if without marks) to self-check and complete the course. As is, I was unable to find a way to "complete" in a way that would move the course from enrolled to completed on my profile. | auditing students could also do the | Quizz | (even if without marks) to self-check | Negative | -0.67 | 0.5 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | I learned a lot with this course. The Teacher is great!! . I don´t know how to see the quiz result, to search my wrong answer . Thank you! | don´t know how to see the | Quizz | result, to search my wrong answer | Negative | -0.63 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine this class has been one of my favorite since I've joined Coursera. In the course I've learn so much about project management & everything related to this subject. One of my favorite part of this course is when I can take the quiz as many times as I want in order for me to get right & pass the course. Thank you so much University Of California, Irvine & Coursera Keep up the good work. | is when I can take the | Quizz | as many times as I want | Positive | 0.75 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | It's a great course but i think that needs more assignments not only quiz. | that needs more assignments not only | Quizz | | Positive | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| PLnREdJzEeSeOiIACzWBkQ | Assignments/ Quiz were a bit easy. | Assignments/ | Quizz | were a bit easy. | Positive | 0.78 | 0.5 | 0.71 | 0.94 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Information needs be updated especially with the changes just made in France 2015. It was a little slow and quizzes were often frustrating due to questions and answers not matching up, or info was not given in the lecture. Overall, since it was 101 and basic, I enjoyed learning the new information. | It was a little slow and | Quizz | were often frustrating due to questions | Positive | 0.96 | 0.0 | 0.94 | 0.96 |
| q6P-8ed8EeSglCIACzUL2A | Covers a lot of ground, but the quizzes don't always line up with the material, the prof speaks painfully slow (needed to speed it up) and the info is getting dated. | a lot of ground, but the | Quizz | don't always line up with the | Negative | -0.85 | 0.5 | 0.94 | 0.96 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | Well-structured course, Dr. Pienta and his fellow team-members are passionate in what they do, and that's evident during the course, but I can't help to think that they have barely scratched the surface here... The lectures are good, they provide a lot of information, but the quizzes offer no challenge whatsoever. That was somewhat disappointing, it felt like I was cheating. All in all, I don't regret buying and completing the course, but I really hope that Dr. Pienta's team will be back soon with a more challenging and advanced course. | a lot of information, but the | Quizz | offer no challenge whatsoever. That was | Negative | -0.73 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1.06 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | I loved this course as I found the topic fascinating (the 10 hallmarks absolutely blew my mind - those cancer cells are so conniving!). I think the instructors did a fantastic job delivering the material. I am a Product Manager in the software industry, and I took this class for my personal curiosity. I wish we were able to submit the answers to the quiz without officially purchasing the course. I did not purchase the course as it does not pertain to my profession and I do not really need a certification for it. | to submit the answers to the | Quizz | without officially purchasing the course. I | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 1.06 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | This was an interesting cancer basics class -- quick and simple for those with minimal background in oncology. The only disappointment was that the course description mentioned quizzes could be taken for no cost, but that turned out not to be true. Nevertheless, it was a valuable course. | was that the course description mentioned | Quizz | could be taken for no cost, | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 1.06 |
| q78Cq1x8EeW9BBKT5ztNhQ | You cannot do the quizes unless you pay. | You cannot do the | Quizz | unless you pay. | Negative | -0.74 | -1.0 | 0.9 | 1.06 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | dont like is the pop up | Quizz | Its not that the quiz is | Negative | -0.73 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | up quiz. Its not that the | Quizz | is bad but the pop up | Negative | -0.83 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | topic. You could have executed the | Quizz | just like the polls where there | Negative | -0.88 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | I am really enjoying this course. Its so nicely planned out and put together. Prof Raj speaks so eloquently thats easy to follow him. I love the way instructions are provided to submit the assignments. In other coursera courses I have mostly quit because of the lack of proper instructions during the assignments and also additional help. Not this one. What I dont like is the pop up quiz. Its not that the quiz is bad but the pop up destroys the flow of the topic. You could have executed the quiz just like the polls where there is a pause by the Prof and then comes the quiz. It would ensure a coherence in the videos. But overall a great course. | the Prof and then comes the | Quizz | It would ensure a coherence in | Negative | -0.75 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Good fun & very thought-provoking. Deductions for sometimes lousy sound quality of videos and inane placing of quizzes. | of videos and inane placing of | Quizz | | Negative | -0.87 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | A very good course. My only suggestions would be to extend the course for a week or even two. The time and amount of work needed to complete the last week's assignments were inconsistent with the other weeks. To have done my best with the final quiz and assignment, I should have spent a significant amount of time reviewing material from previous weeks. | done my best with the final | Quizz | and assignment, I should have spent | Negative | -0.99 | 0.5 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | Prof Raj is a charismatic and engaging professor. Although at first glance, the content may seem theoretically heavy and dull, he teaches in an entertaining way without jargon, and with lots of anecdotes and metaphors, making it easy to follow, and most of all, fun to learn. I would definitely recommend this course for you! OVERVIEW Each module and the entirety of the course is structured very comprehensively. The lectures incorporate various professors who are experts in their field via video conference, telephone, and quotes. Lecture videos (though sometimes long) have lots of embedded quizzes and relevant external videos. Just like taking a course at university, supplemental (yet an optional) reading list is provided for those who wish to explore further. LECTURE VIDEOS Prof Raj definitely knows what he is talking about and the videos are easy to follow. There are only a few videos where the audio isn't the best, but transcripts can be downloaded on Coursera, and a clean-format of the transcription can be found on the Facebook page. The animations, lighting, audio, in general are all great. THE COMMUNITY The discussion forum is very active. With at least three mentors active during the duration of the course, and at least one responding to a post within a business day, you won't feel like you're taking the course alone. CAUTION ! Although it states that time commitment is 2-3 hours a week, it will most likely take more than that. The total number of minutes spent on watching all lecture videos (for that week) averages to a little over 2 hours. If you're like me and want to take notes or take a break while studying or re-watch a lecture, you'll need more time. Plus on top of that, there are quizzes and assignments. (You can save time by not submitting assignments via the ISB website.) I would allocate minimum 3 hours a week for this course and maximum 5. Bare this in mind for those who are working or studying full-time or are taking other MOOC courses. - Enjoy the course! | on top of that, there are | Quizz | and assignments. (You can save time | Negative | -0.98 | 1.0 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | That was very informative and motivating course. I wish the quiz was not that detail oriented and hard.. | and motivating course. I wish the | Quizz | was not that detail oriented and | Negative | -0.78 | 0.0 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QEXoJRBmEeWhsgqB1eduww | loved the pace and check in quizzes. like a classroom | loved the pace and check in | Quizz | like a classroom | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.43 | 0.98 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There needs to be more help available, at least for paying students, to answer questions and clear misunderstanding. The quizzes are taking too much time. | answer questions and clear misunderstanding. The | Quizz | are taking too much time. | Negative | -0.93 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | The material is very interesting with well-made videos. Great course to get an introduction to Tableau. The downside for me was that some videos were rushed with as they had too much content, and quizzes could be much better, I found the questions not really up-to-par with the course content. | they had too much content, and | Quizz | could be much better, I found | Negative | -0.95 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent Course! The Quiz is quite challenging but really useful. All the exercises are well designed to guid you step by step to not only learn tableau software but also form an intuition of analyze real business data. I indeed recommend you fellows taking this course! It will be beneficial. | Excellent Course! The | Quizz | is quite challenging but really useful. | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | There is a gap between the instruction level and the difficulty of quizzes and final projects. | instruction level and the difficulty of | Quizz | and final projects. | Positive | 0.95 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Good brush on Tableau. Great that the course included a 6 mo license to Tableau Desktop! However while more complex topics where touched, they were rushed also. An extra week or two at the more advanced stuff would've been beneficial. Some of the quizzes also were a bit silly and focusing on minor things. | would've been beneficial. Some of the | Quizz | also were a bit silly and | Negative | -0.89 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Nice course if anyone wants to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & Quizes are relevant. It would be nice if solutions are provided for both the practise excersies and the quizes. | to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & | Quizz | are relevant. It would be nice | Negative | -0.71 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Nice course if anyone wants to learn Tableau. Practise exercises & Quizes are relevant. It would be nice if solutions are provided for both the practise excersies and the quizes. | both the practise excersies and the | Quizz | | Positive | 0.78 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| QoJxNRnoEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Professor is engaging and I am happy there are so many video lectures, it is really nice and you feel you are genuinely progressing. Quizzes are very tough though and this course requires a lot of dedication and some frequent repeats of the videos to understand the material. | you feel you are genuinely progressing. | Quizz | are very tough though and this | Positive | 0.94 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.13 |
| Qx-vkAocEeWAYyIACmGIdw | The algorithms presented in this course are interesting. However, the quizzes contain some questions that have no apparent relation to the content of the lectures, and some questions about details of the presented algorithms which are explained in neither the lectures, nor in the papers from which the lectures are derived. Also, most of the sample implementations will not run on a modern computer. They only work on Windows with Java 6 installed. | this course are interesting. However, the | Quizz | contain some questions that have no | Negative | -0.75 | -0.5 | 0.77 | 0.94 |
| Qx-vkAocEeWAYyIACmGIdw | The lectures were good but when it came to quizzes and assignments, we do not know what to do? The questions were very complicated and not stated in the Lectures | good but when it came to | Quizz | and assignments, we do not know | Positive | 0.71 | -1.0 | 0.77 | 0.94 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The contents and quality of the video lectures are great. The quality of the supplementary materials (like the quizzes and the Matlab code) provided by TAs for the assignments are very poor. The assignment guides are written with very poor grammar. The Matlab code is written using the worst coding and documenting practices. The automatic evaluation system (the system for grade the submissions), doest't provide useful feedback. As people can read in the course discussion forums, students have been asking for months for improvements to the grading systems. | of the supplementary materials (like the | Quizz | and the Matlab code) provided by | Positive | 0.66 | -0.5 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The topic is interesting and the lectures itself were good. The explanations of the algorithms and concepts was clear and easy to understand. However, the amount of material covered is very little. I think there should either be more concepts thought or they should be covered in more depth. Quizzes: The quizzes were very weak. They didn't really tell you weather you understood the concept or not. If one of the answers was wrong there was no information which one it was. So you have no idea which lecture you should watch again. Assignments: The assignments were very bad prepared. In some assignments there were bugs in the provided code, we weren't supposed to edit. The assignments itself are rather easy and can be completed quite quickly, if there wasn't the grader. From the grading you got no information what was wrong or which tests passed or failed. Most of the time it wasn't the case that the algorithm failed, instead the output was not as expected by the grader, although it was as described in the assignment. But you never knew. This part has to be improved a lot. Overall I have to say that I expected much more from University of Pennsylvania, especially after taking the first part of the Specialization which was of good quality. | should be covered in more depth. | Quizz | The quizzes were very weak. They | Negative | -0.97 | -1.0 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | The topic is interesting and the lectures itself were good. The explanations of the algorithms and concepts was clear and easy to understand. However, the amount of material covered is very little. I think there should either be more concepts thought or they should be covered in more depth. Quizzes: The quizzes were very weak. They didn't really tell you weather you understood the concept or not. If one of the answers was wrong there was no information which one it was. So you have no idea which lecture you should watch again. Assignments: The assignments were very bad prepared. In some assignments there were bugs in the provided code, we weren't supposed to edit. The assignments itself are rather easy and can be completed quite quickly, if there wasn't the grader. From the grading you got no information what was wrong or which tests passed or failed. Most of the time it wasn't the case that the algorithm failed, instead the output was not as expected by the grader, although it was as described in the assignment. But you never knew. This part has to be improved a lot. Overall I have to say that I expected much more from University of Pennsylvania, especially after taking the first part of the Specialization which was of good quality. | covered in more depth. Quizzes: The | Quizz | were very weak. They didn't really | Negative | -0.98 | -1.0 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | assessments were the worst part. The | Quizz | barely tested what I had learnt | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | that you could easily brute-force these | Quizz | if you really wanted to. Compare | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| r8zaNVu-EeW0ugrg2GGh4Q | So I'll start with the positives. The material was appropriate and interesting and well presented. CJ Taylor is an enthusiastic lecturer and the material was presented in an enjoyable easy to understand way and having finished the course, I definitely want to learn more about computational motion planning. The problems I have with this course though are numerous. This is the second part of the Robotics Specialization and compared to the first part, this course was very weak. There was very little lecture material and the course felt thin - as if it were 2 weeks of material stretched over 4. There were many instances where the lectures could have gone in to much more detail and just didn't, I appreciate that you can't cover everything in lectures, but would it have killed you to provide or at least point to some good additional reading resources? The assessments were the worst part. The quizzes barely tested what I had learnt and could mostly be solved by common sense. What I find shocking is that there were so few questions with few multiple choice answer that you could easily brute-force these quizzes if you really wanted to. Compare this to the Aerial Robotics course where the quizzes took time and forced me to think and understand what was discussed in lecture. The programming assignments were shockingly bad. They were hard for completely the wrong reasons. I spent most of my time on them not coding the solution, but trying to figure out what was actually wanted and fixing bugs that were in the provided code that we WEREN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO EDIT. The autograder would never tell you why you were wrong, just "I'm sorry, your solution didn't pass all of our test cases." This meant that finding the solution was based on guesswork rather than considered thought. This was made even worse by the fact that some simulations took a long time to run which made iterating guesses very slow - and doing this on a time limit is just pointlessly stressful. One of the assignments had the solution already in the source code as the instructors had forgotten to take it out. The final assignment wouldn't even run out of the box without fixing bugs in the provided code. This would have taken seconds to check had the person who wrote it bothered to check their work beforehand. Thing is, the tasks provided in principle weren't that hard, they were actually kind of too easy. Dijkstra's algorithm isn't that difficult to implement from scratch, and yet all that was asked of us was to implement a small 10 line for-loop. That said, I appreciate that as a software engineer, I might find this sort of thing much easier than most, but even so I don't feel as though the programming assignments helped me learn anything. Overall, regardless of how interesting the material was, this course was very shoddily put together. I appreciate this is the first time the course has been run, but this really felt phoned in and unacceptable. I paid money for this course and the quality of it is notably worse than most free MOOCs I have taken. I feel ripped off and I sincerely hope that the next section is better otherwise I doubt I will bother to continue until the end. I thought Penn University was better than this. | the Aerial Robotics course where the | Quizz | took time and forced me to | Negative | -0.73 | -0.5 | 0.53 | 1.11 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | It's ok. Bushee is very knowledgeable and a very enthusiastic teacher, but his lessons are too dense compared to the content in the rest of the Wharton BA programs. I actually like all the detail, but I think it's covered too quickly and the course should probably be made longer to deal with it all. There are ratios and balance sheet jargon just flying at you at a breathless pace. It would be better to focus on a few key ones and then walk through the examples a little more slowly. The quizzes were extremely tricky with too many choose more than one answers. It was difficult to find the parts of the video to review missed questions because 1) the transcripts are machine generated and make it difficult to search specific words and 2) it's difficult to remember where the concept was covered because there was so much in each video. The last week felt very disconnected from the first week and like it belonged in a different course almost. It was pretty good, though. I liked how it contained specific examples and charts. | examples a little more slowly. The | Quizz | were extremely tricky with too many | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | missing for me was some in-line | Quizz | Not the “tell me what I | Negative | -0.92 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | said they don’t find the in-line | Quizz | valuable. But, is that a reflection | Positive | 0.71 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | reflection of the value of in-line | Quizz | as a whole or just in-line | Positive | 0.89 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | as a whole or just in-line | Quizz | that simply require “parroting” something said | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | Week 1 Video 1 the in-line | Quizz | might provide some numbers for De-levered | Negative | -0.85 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | the students to have some in-line | Quizz | – this not only breaks up | Negative | -0.68 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | key concepts. I really liked the | Quizz | for Week 1 even though I | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | there are multiple correct responses. The | Quizz | effectively reinforces the information covered very | Positive | 0.82 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | that the questions may change from | Quizz | to quiz. In many of these | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | questions may change from quiz to | Quizz | In many of these on-demand courses, | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | up the lectures – some in-line | Quizz | questions might help. This would also | Negative | -0.64 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rc5KG0aUEeWG1w6arGoEIQ | This is my feedback as a Beta-Tester for the course: Week 1 I thought that the videos were clear, well organized and flowed well from topic to topic. There was a clear logic as the professor developed the various ratios. What was missing for me was some in-line quizzes. Not the “tell me what I just told you type” but rather ones that make you think. So, for example, in the final video for Week 1, the optional video, instead of just suggesting that the students “play” with the spreadsheet, I think it would be better to give them an actual task or two… “change the assumption about X to <this value>. What is the impact on the Y ratio? Why?” I liked that he showed what numbers needed to be changed to make the share valuation closer to $55. But rather than just telling us the answer, this would be another opportunity to have the students stop the video and go try it themselves. With a specific task, it is likely that more students will go and work with the spreadsheet. This is where the real learning takes place. One of the things that I really liked about the design of prior courses by Professor Bushee was the fact that he had examples throughout the videos that had you apply the information right away. But, perhaps this is just me. I know that I learn a lot better by doing rather than just watching the videos and going “yeah… that makes sense. I understand…” I also recognize that some students, in past courses, have probably said they don’t find the in-line quizzes valuable. But, is that a reflection of the value of in-line quizzes as a whole or just in-line quizzes that simply require “parroting” something said in the video. I’m sure that the professor can come up with lots of examples. In Week 1 Video 1 the in-line quiz might provide some numbers for De-levered Net Income, Sales, Average Total Assets and Average Shareholder’s Equity and asking for the results of each of the ratios in the Dupont Analysis. And maybe a “think about what this means” type question that is not necessarily “marked” but for which an answer is provided in the video. Alternatively, he could have the students change some specific things in the Woof Junction spreadsheet and indicate what impact that has on the ratios and why. Week 1 Video 2 offers lots of similar opportunities with the Profitability and Turnover Ratios. Perhaps requiring the students to work backwards from a specific ratio to determine gross profit would be effective. Or, perhaps a question that relates strategy specifically to the ratios. For example, what would happen to the Gross Margin if Woof introduced a credit card and days receivable increased to 31.6 in 2015? Just something to engage people with the materials. All of the videos offer similar opportunities and I think having specific problems or questions will enhance the learning experience rather than just suggesting that they “go look at the spreadsheet”. The audience for these courses tends to be quite a bit different from your average upper tier university student and probably needs a bit more “hand holding” and “direction” in order to be successful. Also, if Professor Bushee expects students will watch the optional videos anyway, why make them optional? In the case of the Valuation Video, despite some of the mathematics being a little “scary” for some students, I think that the information there is really useful and helps to solidify an understanding of the spreadsheet. I’m wondering if an in-quiz question would be helpful. Perhaps it might provide a new set of financials for Woof Junction and ask for ratio calculation and what that means in terms of their position in the marketplace or something similar. Just some practice questions to get people working with the information. Same comments basically apply for the remainder of the weeks. I think that it would help the students to have some in-line quizzes – this not only breaks up the longer videos and helps to keep students focused but also provides a reinforcement of key concepts. I really liked the quiz for Week 1 even though I struggled with the questions where there are multiple correct responses. The quiz effectively reinforces the information covered very well and requires one to think about what was covered in the lectures. You may want to remind students that the questions may change from quiz to quiz. In many of these on-demand courses, the quiz questions do not change and students may be in the habit of not rereading the questions they have gotten correct on previous attempts. Week 2 – Revenue After Cash Collection at 7:39 – talking about Days Unearned Revenue and mentions that an “increase means slower future recognition”. A bit more explanation around what that means would be useful. Week 3 – no particular additional comments on the lectures other than some in-line questions might be good.. I found Benford’s Law really interesting. Week 4. It would be really nice to have something to break up the lectures – some in-line quiz questions might help. This would also help to reinforce the material. Week 4 quiz Question 9 -, the double negative wording of the question and the correct response may cause confusion for students – particularly for those for whom English is not their native language. Overall Comments I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. I was wondering whether it would be possible to provide a summary document with all the key information from each week related to the ratio calculations and the key things to look for related to those ratios. I know that the ratios are provided in the spreadsheet but it might be good to have a written summary with some supplemental information about how to use the ratios. I think in-line quizzes or practice questions would be helpful for students – perhaps ones that asked students to do specific things in the spreadsheet and come back with an answer. They don’t need to be long or complicated – just something that gets people into the spreadsheets and working with them early. You may want to do something stronger to encourage them to “play” with the spreadsheet. Many will feel reluctant to change the numbers in the spreadsheet for fear of “messing” it up. Perhaps a reminder that they can change whatever they want because if they mess something up they can always download it again. Or they can save a copy and play in that leaving the original untouched. It also might be a good idea to have a “playground” sheet where there is a simple set of Financial Statements and the students can try changing things in the financial statements and see the impact on the key ratios without having to move from one spreadsheet to another – so, a combination of the Original tab and the first two columns of the Ratios tab. You might even want to have two columns for the ratios – one for the ratios with the original numbers that does not change (fixed values) and one for the changed numbers, so students can see the effect of the changes easily. In terms of the spreadsheets, I thought that the Original, the Ratios and the CommonSize tabs were fairly straight forward and relatively easy to understand. That may not be the case for people less familiar with MS-EXCEL but I don’t know what the target audience is for this course so the students may all be proficient with the tool. On the Valuation tab, I was wondering if the numbers in Row 41 should be highlighted in some way to emphasize that they are Years. That is not clear on first glance. There are a lot of mistakes in the subtitles. I pointed out many of these by flagging the specific videos where they occurred. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the beta-test of this course. I hope that my comments are helpful and that I have not missed too much that causes students issues as the course goes live. | use the ratios. I think in-line | Quizz | or practice questions would be helpful | Negative | -0.8 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 0.95 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I probably have to rate this course 5 stars just for the supplementary reading materials provided. There's a lot of great information provided here. This course helps formalize a process that highly talented people just do intuitively. With the information within, you're able to better understand different aspects of your creative process. At times, the professor's delivery can be a little distracting (he has quite a few awkward pauses in the middle of thoughts, and uses the phrase, "right?" a little too unconsciously). I also found some of the lecture material difficult to connect in a practical sense. Some aspects of the design, play, experience model could use better examples in lecture to make the points more concrete. It is a deep model, and they do in fact point you to a whitepaper published on it so there is that, but just for the sake of the lessons; the examples need better explanation. The quizzes were easy, but challenging in the wrong way. Often, questions are posed that weren't ever directly answered in lecture or the materials, and sometimes they are worded in ways that make it difficult to pinpoint what they are looking for. It would be nice to see student responses to the free-response questions make a comeback in future lessons or at least know that they could possibly carry into the material used to teach the next incoming class. The assignments follow a logical progression, and again are supplemented with great materials. The review system is a little wonky. I've posted in the boards about this. They need to make the criteria more clear. The community activity is pretty low. I'm not sure how this can be addressed, but overall this is a great course and perfect second stop on the journey towards the Game Design and Development specialization. | the examples need better explanation. The | Quizz | were easy, but challenging in the | Negative | -0.71 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The quizzes were too short to be effective, and without requiring written feedback from peer review, the process doesn't seem very useful. The best information was from the articles and books he recommends. | The | Quizz | were too short to be effective, | Negative | -0.93 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course was a little stressful, but it seriously pays off. The instructor was excellent, he explains everything clearly and gave us quizzes and projects not only to do, but to really learn from. He discusses subjects that really are worth thinking about, if you are considering becoming a Game Designer. I highly recommend this course for avid learners and those that would love to work hands-on on projects that concern Game Design. | explains everything clearly and gave us | Quizz | and projects not only to do, | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | I found the assignments and the | Quizz | not that great. I reckon the | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | After the excellent first course in the specialisation, this was quite a disappointment. I realise that the subject matter in this course will inevitably involve abstract concepts and subjective opinions, but I didn't really 'get' the way that Casey was presenting the subject given that there were quizzes and assignments to follow. That's not to say that the videos aren't interesting. But, given their rambling style, they would be much more useful as reference material rather than driving the course, in my opinion. Many of the questions in the quizzes felt like they'd been added simply to make them up to the correct number. Some were so loose that you could write any answer and I'm sure you'd get a mark! Also, I'd say not to even start this course unless you have a clear idea for a game. The assignments require you to produce design documents that are tedious, going on impossible, to write without some firm rooted idea to start from. Maybe if you really want to be a game designer then this will be the course for you. If you are doing the course out of curiosity, for fun, or to learn how to control Unity, I'd give it a miss. | the subject given that there were | Quizz | and assignments to follow. That's not | Negative | -0.82 | -1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | After the excellent first course in the specialisation, this was quite a disappointment. I realise that the subject matter in this course will inevitably involve abstract concepts and subjective opinions, but I didn't really 'get' the way that Casey was presenting the subject given that there were quizzes and assignments to follow. That's not to say that the videos aren't interesting. But, given their rambling style, they would be much more useful as reference material rather than driving the course, in my opinion. Many of the questions in the quizzes felt like they'd been added simply to make them up to the correct number. Some were so loose that you could write any answer and I'm sure you'd get a mark! Also, I'd say not to even start this course unless you have a clear idea for a game. The assignments require you to produce design documents that are tedious, going on impossible, to write without some firm rooted idea to start from. Maybe if you really want to be a game designer then this will be the course for you. If you are doing the course out of curiosity, for fun, or to learn how to control Unity, I'd give it a miss. | Many of the questions in the | Quizz | felt like they'd been added simply | Negative | -0.81 | -1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This is a great course, if you want to hear The Questions you need to Answer to make a good game design for your game. It does not give you the answers, but it gives you a road map to follow. Downside of the course are Quizes and Peer Reviews. Quizes sometimes have shady and non-clear answers, especially for non-native English speakers. Assignments grading criteria makes your peers to choose from 1 to 5. And 5 is "you did so awesome, that you've impressed your peer very much". And this is not happening often. | follow. Downside of the course are | Quizz | and Peer Reviews. Quizes sometimes have | Positive | 0.88 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | A pretty nifty course for game design. I loved getting to work on the documentation planning for the game I was creating. Simple and easy to follow. Some of the quiz questions were a bit tricky as I had spent more time than I though I would, going back to the lectures to review the questions. | easy to follow. Some of the | Quizz | questions were a bit tricky as | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | I learn a lot by doing assignments and reviewing other people's assignments. The important con of this course was some of its quizzes' questions which was ambiguous or badly framed. | this course was some of its | Quizz | questions which was ambiguous or badly | Negative | -0.76 | 0.5 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | The information is good but is going too fast and I don't feel I have learned much from it. I'm on week 3 and I'm still not sure of how to make my assignments in a proper way. The quizzes are very confusing too and sometimes I felt frustrated. | assignments in a proper way. The | Quizz | are very confusing too and sometimes | Positive | 0.83 | -0.5 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This course has a good starting point, but there are so many things that ended up being wrong that I just can't force myself to give it more than 3 stars (and I'm not sure if it should be 3 or 2 stars). I think this is also the first course on Coursera that didn't get 5 stars from me (not sure if I've given 4 stars once only). So the bad parts first: Assignments are so unrealistic it's unbelievable. Week 1 is doable. Week 2 is problematic if you have a complex idea, let's say it's still doable, but you would certainly need more time than expected weekly hour work. Week 3 is insane. It is so out of the scope of this course. And week 4 is even worse, I had to use pen and paper and then explain only 1 of the core mechanics (even that used more than expected weekly hour work). Some of the quizzes are not fully clear if you are not a native English speaker. Sometimes I had to re-read things several times, and still wasn't sure what I was doing wrong (I realized that only after I managed to literally guess the correct answer). And most of all grading is the worst I've seen in any course. All of it based on a personal opinion. Hey I even managed not to get full points for a "document is HTML/PDF/....". I mean - how can I not get full points there? It either is or is not a HTML. It's so much subjective that it's making it awful. Now about the good parts: Professor did a great job, the course inspired so many ideas for me. The material is concise and it was a pleasure listening to this course. Most of the courses are too slow for me, so I have to fast forward them to 1.5 and some even to 2 times speed. I've run this course only on 1.25 speed, which is a good thing. I'm not a native English speaker. | weekly hour work). Some of the | Quizz | are not fully clear if you | Negative | -0.66 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | This class started out very rocky and the videos had errors, the quizzes had problems, and the assignments had a poor grading system. Hopefully, these will be corrected in future offerings. | and the videos had errors, the | Quizz | had problems, and the assignments had | Negative | -0.73 | 0.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| rKbbMST9EeWtRg6boA3D-Q | One of the worst courses that I have taken in coursera. The videos feel unstructured without preparation and boring. The quizes are subjective. You can pass all of then without watching a single video or lecture. The assignments are interesting but the way of grading them are bad designed and subjective. Sad, I passed this course without trouble but made me stop wanting to get the full specialization. Spartans! Review the course or better close it. Its a shame. | unstructured without preparation and boring. The | Quizz | are subjective. You can pass all | Negative | -1.0 | -1.0 | 1.01 | 1.09 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Really helpful, but the quiz is a little difficult. I think class would better be extend to 5 weeks. | Really helpful, but the | Quizz | is a little difficult. I think | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I will break down the review into the contents and comment on them. Before doing that and saving the trouble for people who do not like to read a lot - This course is an awesome kick-starter for R-programming. Video Lectures : The speed and content are just perfect. The concepts covered in each lecture and the manner in which it was taught just made them stick well in my mind. 2. Quiz - They were simple so I infer that they are meant to test how well we have learnt the concepts. 3. Swirl Practice Programming Assignments - A very innovative way to teach us in the R console itself. I really enjoyed playing with it. 4. Programming Assignment - It was a sheer pleasure to do the last assignment. The level was really good. I found it a bit daunting at first but then caught up by reviewing some concepts. 5. Discussion Forums - I couldn't be very active in terms of replying but I never missed to hear what mentors had to say. I owe thanks to mentors for their awesome posts that gave deeper insights especially Al Warren. I highly recommend this course. Prof. Peng - your videos are really good and far from boring. And yes, Thank you Coursera. | stick well in my mind. 2. | Quizz | - They were simple so I | Negative | -0.8 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This was actually pretty hard. I felt like the questions asked in the quiz were considerable above and beyond what was taught - and the amount of R itself taught felt like being thrown in the deep end. | like the questions asked in the | Quizz | were considerable above and beyond what | Negative | -0.65 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | So the course is a mixed bag. PROS: The lecture content is useful, albeit a bit dry. I can't give them too much slack for the dryness, after all it's coding. However, they could have shown more real-time coding, rather than just scrolled through powerpoints with the Command Window pasted. You definitely need to have R open when following along with the lectures. The quizzes are also quite useful, as you're required to know both the background of how things work and use the commands learned from the lecture. CONS: The assignments assume you know a lot more than the basic knowledge, and there's no real way to know how to do the assignments just from the lectures. The quizzes tend to be on the easy side and the assignments ramp things up quite quickly. There's no intermediate material to test your skill. You have to have worked in R to have even a minor chance at succeeding on the assignments. | following along with the lectures. The | Quizz | are also quite useful, as you're | Positive | 0.96 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | So the course is a mixed bag. PROS: The lecture content is useful, albeit a bit dry. I can't give them too much slack for the dryness, after all it's coding. However, they could have shown more real-time coding, rather than just scrolled through powerpoints with the Command Window pasted. You definitely need to have R open when following along with the lectures. The quizzes are also quite useful, as you're required to know both the background of how things work and use the commands learned from the lecture. CONS: The assignments assume you know a lot more than the basic knowledge, and there's no real way to know how to do the assignments just from the lectures. The quizzes tend to be on the easy side and the assignments ramp things up quite quickly. There's no intermediate material to test your skill. You have to have worked in R to have even a minor chance at succeeding on the assignments. | assignments just from the lectures. The | Quizz | tend to be on the easy | Positive | 0.89 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This course is not set up right, the assignments ask you to do things that aren't explained until the next weeks content, its kind of discouraging. In the end, it does teach you the basics of R, its just too bad that the way to get there is aggravating. The reason I still only give it 2 stars is because of the quality of the courses itself. There are many, many 1 and 2 minute videos, these could've easily been combined. The teacher seems unprepared in his lectures, he stutters and repeats a lot and makes a weird noise between slides. This shouldn't be necessary with pre-recorded lectures. The assignments and quizzes are also poorly written and contain spelling and sloppy mistakes, which doesn't make sense because the material isn't new. It all just makes it seem like the teacher doesn't really care and just wants to sell the course to a lot of people without putting in much effort. If you are not following the specialization I would not advise this course for beginners. I'm quite surprised to see the course get such high ratings. | with pre-recorded lectures. The assignments and | Quizz | are also poorly written and contain | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Quiz and especially assignments were poorly written. Spelling mistakes in slides is simply unacceptable in high-level academia, in my opinion. Especially for a course designed for a global audience. | | Quizz | and especially assignments were poorly written. | Negative | -0.96 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This course was mostly self learning. It gave me a framework to go along but what is presented in lecture and assignments are completely different. The discussion board and mentors are really good resources and can provide pointers to move along. It is definitely not a class that can provide sufficient information to learn and build applications, but the individual's effort in passing the quizzes and the projects will. It is up to the student to figure out through stack overflow, youtube, and other search result to figure out how to complete these assignments. I believe the assignments given from this class are realistic to real-world situations. | the individual's effort in passing the | Quizz | and the projects will. It is | Negative | -0.75 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | little R programming. 2. ) The | Quizz | questions are totally unrelated from the | Negative | -0.72 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | they expect you to accomplish intermediate | Quizz | 3. ) The instructor has no | Negative | -0.85 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | If you are planning to learn R, then go and buy a book. This course is a complete scam. At least don't pay any money. The reasons; 1.) They advertise that you need couple of hours of study per week. That's a lie, you have to study much more than that unless if you know a little R programming. 2.) The quiz questions are totally unrelated from the lessons. They teach you the basic stuff but they expect you to accomplish intermediate quizzes. 3.) The instructor has no idea how to teach. May be he is trying to prove something. I couldn't really understand his motives. If you really want to teach that's simple. You do couple of extra videos and teach whatever you are asking in quizzes, or tell us to read a certain material. He didn't do any of them which means he either doesn't know how to teach or this specialization is a complete scam. 4.) And I don't really understand what coursera is doing by the way? What kind of a business model is this. I was planning to enroll many specializations but now I am not going to do it. So think about how much they are loosing. Where is the quality assurance. Just because one guy comes up to you and say that he teaches this and that do you believe them? MY ADVICE TO YOU: DON'T PAY ANYTHING FOR THIS SPECIALIZATION. AND FOR ANY OTHER COURSE READ THE BAD REVIEWS FIRST (WHICH WAS MY MISTAKE). | teach whatever you are asking in | Quizz | or tell us to read a | Negative | -0.91 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The combination of assignments and quiz were amazing, It did make me relook at things I though I was clear. Coding made it challenging and exciting | The combination of assignments and | Quizz | were amazing, It did make me | Positive | 0.97 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Videos are poorly narrated and are marginally effective: vocabulary + key concepts only. The "swirl" exercises are woefully inadequate to prepare students for the quizzes. Foundational tasks (i.e. establishing a valid connection to the sample data) are conspicuously absent from the guided exercises; leaving too many students to seek help from message boards and google. Lastly, the "professors" are completely unreachable: they may as well be dead. After 30 years in the IT industry, I found this course to be profoundly aggravating and a complete waste of my time - I have abandoned this course and bought a "Teach Yourself" book instead. | inadequate to prepare students for the | Quizz | Foundational tasks (i. e. establishing a | Negative | -0.67 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | This is a fast-paced and autodidact course. You'll learn in a real life environment (unlike the incredibly boring DataCamp courses). Instead of providing exercises you must be curious and learn and look for whatever you want. The quizzes were always challenging, sometimes going beyond the course material -which is, in my opinion, a great decission-. I learned in a month what I could have learned in 3 or 4 with DataCamp. I thank Roger D. Peng for making this course possible. | look for whatever you want. The | Quizz | were always challenging, sometimes going beyond | Negative | -0.76 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The new platform Sucks!!! The people who just want to learn for free and not purchase a certificate are barred from attempting the quizzes unlike the old platform. Not being able to take the quizzes completely ruins the learning experience. | certificate are barred from attempting the | Quizz | unlike the old platform. Not being | Positive | 0.8 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The new platform Sucks!!! The people who just want to learn for free and not purchase a certificate are barred from attempting the quizzes unlike the old platform. Not being able to take the quizzes completely ruins the learning experience. | Not being able to take the | Quizz | completely ruins the learning experience. | Positive | 0.88 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The video lectures will help you to pass the quizzes, as they are primarily theory and background. The lectures will not, however, aide you in any way in completing the programming assignments. The first programming assignment is extremely difficult and very little is done in the lectures, the textbook, or in swirl to pull all of the pieces together prior to the first programming assignment/quiz. There are so many disparate concepts, that it would be nice if the instructor could at the very least, demonstrate a full analysis of some kind of tabular data in R. How to properly import the data, create the file, structure the data, and then perform some analysis. These concepts are introduced throughout the course, but never brought together in one complete project. | will help you to pass the | Quizz | as they are primarily theory and | Negative | -0.78 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I must confess that this course is difficult for who is beginning programming with R, the assignments require a lot of work and they are very involved. Nevertheless, I´m extremely satisfied. The book and the lectures are very good and the quizes and exercises forces you to really understand what you are doing or you cannot pass...it is what I really wanted! Thank you Coursera and special thanks to the instructor for his great work! | lectures are very good and the | Quizz | and exercises forces you to really | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Huge gap between theory and programming assignments, however quizzes are interesting and require some time to complete. | between theory and programming assignments, however | Quizz | are interesting and require some time | Positive | 0.67 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Only the most basic of instructions for R, which are bland and easily read in the documentation or other free resources. There are very few best practices or real examples to use anything found within. The quizzes and assignments do not match the lecture material and are contrived. Not worth the money! | to use anything found within. The | Quizz | and assignments do not match the | Negative | -0.79 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Thanks to Coursera and Prof. Roger D. Peng for offering such a wonderful course on R Programming. Before the start of this session, my knowledge of R Programming is NIL. After attending the session, I'm confident that I could program in R and level of my knowledge is more than that of fresher. Thanks for the well designed course on R. The Quizzes and Assignments are good and helped me test my understanding. These helped me improve my confidence level as well. I appreciate Professors special video session before difficult assignment. Just following these sessions closely, I could complete the assignment to my satisfaction and have confidence to attempt and complete. I completed this course in the old format. Do I need to repeat it in the new format ? The Discussion Forums are amazingly helpful in sharing subject knowledge and making the learning Fun. Getting help from some corner of the world and getting thanks from some other corner of the world makes this learning truly Universal and great Fun. Thanks again to Coursera and Prof. Roger D. Peng. Wishing Coursera and my Professors all the best and Success always. Best Wishes, S. Ramalakshmanan | well designed course on R. The | Quizz | and Assignments are good and helped | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | R Programming in Coursera is a great course. You will learn a lot about R and a lot about advanced programming. But you will suffer along the way. Every lesson brings tons of knowledge, and every quiz will leave you with the feeling you only knew half of what was needed. You will have to fill in the blanks, which is easier if you have previous knowledge of R and/or have previous coding know-how. From someone who had taken other R programming courses, I loved and hated this one at the same time. It's a great way to really learn R, but be ready to put the additional hours and reading required to successfully pass. | brings tons of knowledge, and every | Quizz | will leave you with the feeling | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The content and the speed that they teach you R are actually good. But considering that we now have to pay 45€/49$ for the course you will expect more polished videos and quizzes. Some of the videos are just stutters, repetitions and filling words. It's seems like they have been in a rush without decent preparation. Also one of the quiz questions was simply wrong. This should be fixed. Furthermore some of the commands they present are deprecated and cannot be used anymore. | will expect more polished videos and | Quizz | Some of the videos are just | Positive | 0.66 | -0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The content and the speed that they teach you R are actually good. But considering that we now have to pay 45€/49$ for the course you will expect more polished videos and quizzes. Some of the videos are just stutters, repetitions and filling words. It's seems like they have been in a rush without decent preparation. Also one of the quiz questions was simply wrong. This should be fixed. Furthermore some of the commands they present are deprecated and cannot be used anymore. | decent preparation. Also one of the | Quizz | questions was simply wrong. This should | Positive | 0.63 | -0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The course takes more time and is more informative than the Toolbox course. The material in the videos is quite more basic than the material in the quizzes and assignments, but that should be expected. The only improvement I would suggest is to give lecture material on the deeper concepts involved in the assignments. | basic than the material in the | Quizz | and assignments, but that should be | Negative | -0.76 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The video lectures were engaging with interesting tidbits thrown in to make the potentially dull topic not dull. I personally liked the rhythm and pace with which Dr Peng delivered the content. Also, the swirl exercises are a critical element of this course and I often found it effective to sandwich the swirl exercises between the video and the quiz. Doing this provided an incentive to complete the swirl practice and also made the quiz/assignment less of an exercise in 'dart-throwing' and more of validating what you've learned. Overall, great course to get started with R! | exercises between the video and the | Quizz | Doing this provided an incentive to | Negative | -0.64 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | The lectures are clear and exhaustive. Assignments and quizzes perfectly compliment the content and aptly test the learning. Definitely recommended to anyone who wants to learn. | are clear and exhaustive. Assignments and | Quizz | perfectly compliment the content and aptly | Positive | 0.76 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | i generally think the course needs a lot of improvement as after week 1 the assignments and quizzes don't seem to relate to the course content. we are at very different levels so a more gentle easing and explanation of ideas is necessary other than this apparent quantum leap from one stage to the next. i have had to do a different course else where and i am getting the sort of good introduction into the R language, its not practical to expect everyone to understand the ideas in 4 weeks.programming is hard enough as it is. | after week 1 the assignments and | Quizz | don't seem to relate to the | Negative | -0.95 | -1.0 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | I think the video is much easier than the quizzes and assignments. There is a big gap between the weekly video and the quizzes. | video is much easier than the | Quizz | and assignments. There is a big | Negative | -0.64 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| RMFRum1BEeWXrA6ju0fvnQ | Some problems with quiz | Some problems with | Quizz | | Negative | -0.75 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.11 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | I started this course early and was so excited to learn this new information I just dove right in! Unfortunately I am too far ahead and have to wait a few weeks until I can take my week 2 quiz. Instead of binge watching Netflix at night I get my nightly dose of Positive Psychology! I recommended this course too all of my friends, family and co-workers. | I can take my week 2 | Quizz | Instead of binge watching Netflix at | Negative | -0.96 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.33 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Not a positive act to make people pay to be able to participate in the quizzes. The other audited classes allow everyone to participate in everything. We just do not become certified if we have taken the class for audit rather than credit. | be able to participate in the | Quizz | The other audited classes allow everyone | Positive | 0.81 | -1.0 | 0.96 | 1.33 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Great course material for casual study. This class is not at all demanding but has a lot of useful materials that we can apply in our life. The quiz questions are too simple and obvious but I guess that is not the purpose of this course :) | can apply in our life. The | Quizz | questions are too simple and obvious | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.33 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | It has been an excellent source of learning. I am taking the time to read the books that are recommended with the course thus the learning is richer. The formats used of video, supplemental reading, quiz etc are useful and spot on. Thanks | formats used of video, supplemental reading, | Quizz | etc are useful and spot on. | Positive | 0.65 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.33 |
| rNpCSyQbEeWXzxJxfIL00w | Really interesting and well presented videos. The quizzes were also well thought out with relevant questions without being too difficult. | interesting and well presented videos. The | Quizz | were also well thought out with | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.96 | 1.33 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | It's great that this specialization now get autoGrading for projects. It could be better if the Content Quiz is more challenging. | could be better if the Content | Quizz | is more challenging. | Negative | -0.93 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.23 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The course is fantastic! The professors are very enthusiastic and creative: they explain difficult subjects very clearly and provide visual aids and in-video quizes to enhance more deep understanding of material. Special thanks for the project assignments! They are very interesting and well-laid. I would recommend this course to programmers who want to deepen and practice their data-structures skills. For the novices this course should be taken after the first course of the specialization. | and provide visual aids and in-video | Quizz | to enhance more deep understanding of | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.23 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | The instructors were engaging and most charming in the videos. Most suitable for programming learners taking the step from beginner to intermediate level. The material was divided into fun bite-sized videos, quizzes, and assignments; but still thorough with the details that were necessary. | was divided into fun bite-sized videos, | Quizz | and assignments; but still thorough with | Positive | 0.75 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.23 |
| RO728xoIEeWg_RJGAuFGjw | This is an excellent course with super awesome syllabus. It is taught in an engaging manner, with quizzes. It could have been more improved by adding in-video quiz. | taught in an engaging manner, with | Quizz | It could have been more improved | Negative | -0.78 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.23 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | What can I say? Although it was a tough course but sometimes things were tough, it felt so incredibly fruitful each week. I think the main reason was because even though there were so many quizzes and the assignments which required so much time, they were carefully crafted in a way which helped build my abilities in a progressive manner. There was definitely a close alignment between instruction (video) and the assessments (quizzes/exams). You'll never be asked questions you weren't prepared to answer because of the aforesaid alignment. As I also work in a department which dabbles in educational research, I found the concepts thought in this course directly applicable to what's done in practice. Because the concepts were communicated so clearly, I could readily see examples of them in my everyday work! | even though there were so many | Quizz | and the assignments which required so | Negative | -0.68 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.14 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I definitely learned a lot — I liked how there was a quiz and a brief written assignment every week. Good course! | I liked how there was a | Quizz | and a brief written assignment every | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.14 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | The actual educational value of this course is quite high. The score I can offer it in good faith is dragged down by the additional "assignments" like "Write you own quiz question!" and the expectation to review the quiz questions thought up by other students. Such things in a scientific course are unnecessary and may actually be counterproductive because of the reliance upon other students and their grasp of the material. If they are to remain part of this course, they really should be treated as supplementary and not required to complete the course. It really detracts from the experience for those of us who come here to learn and not to socialize. | and the expectation to review the | Quizz | questions thought up by other students. | Negative | -0.71 | 0.0 | 0.81 | 1.14 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I learned much more in this course than other courses about quantitative methods. It is clear and useful and inspiring. The quizzes are very good, because they are not only about konwledge,but also about whether you can apply the knowledge. And the interviews are very good too, which give us more information in different subjiects, or from different perspectives. But I feel the speaker's speaking speed is a little fast, and I hope that there will be exercise or quizzes in which we are given situation,and asked to come up with RQ, methods, analysis, etc. | clear and useful and inspiring. The | Quizz | are very good, because they are | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.14 |
| rTTFFgb8EeWJMSIAC7Jl0w | I learned much more in this course than other courses about quantitative methods. It is clear and useful and inspiring. The quizzes are very good, because they are not only about konwledge,but also about whether you can apply the knowledge. And the interviews are very good too, which give us more information in different subjiects, or from different perspectives. But I feel the speaker's speaking speed is a little fast, and I hope that there will be exercise or quizzes in which we are given situation,and asked to come up with RQ, methods, analysis, etc. | that there will be exercise or | Quizz | in which we are given situation, | Positive | 0.84 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.14 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | The course materials are very good for anyone who wants to get into SEO. I only gave 4 stars because I personally dislike the quizzes. They don't focus on what's important but rather on small detail questions that don't really matter. Other than that it's a great course! Most of it you can find in books too but with videos & the community it's more fun to learn on Coursera. | stars because I personally dislike the | Quizz | They don't focus on what's important | Negative | -0.8 | 0.5 | 1.06 | 1.07 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Poor grading system. Based on 2 peers' "subjective" points of your week4 analysis assignment, even if you digested all the materials and received 100% on quizzes all weeks, you will have to repeat taking this course endlessly. At first I thought I did not analyze thoroughly so on my second session, I basically rewrote the whole assessment, followed by samples passed students gave me, also making sure I covered all the points the instruction asked me to cover, peer gives me 1 or 1.5 point for writing persona with little detail. I wrote 350 words persona, with stories and demographic of my target audience. Because I am 2.5 points short or so, I have to take this same course for the next round session for the third time, wait it it reaches week 4, resubmit my analysis that is now edited for 4 times. There is no clear guideline, format, or even sample provided, but the grades are left to the peers. Some pass with less than 300 word analysis with a lot of charts and pictures. I did as well but wasn't lucky at my first round so I developed 3 pg. analysis all in words to make it look like a true analytical report, didn't pass again. I do not know what this instructor is looking for as a form of assessment/analysis paper, and only those who are lucky enough to meet sensible peer graders pass. Waste of time, waste of money no one wants to spend lifetime to get a certificate especially when one knows what he or she is talking about. | the materials and received 100% on | Quizz | all weeks, you will have to | Positive | 0.74 | -1.0 | 1.06 | 1.07 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Challenging, thorough and engaging. Repetitive in a good way, by gently going back over content you almost learn by default. The quizzes are professionally prepared and sometimes tough to pass! This is good as you are obliged to think hard, even go back through materials or ask others for advice until the knowledge sticks. Highly recommended and of great practical value. | you almost learn by default. The | Quizz | are professionally prepared and sometimes tough | Positive | 0.86 | 1.0 | 1.06 | 1.07 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Course quality went downhill, compared to previous course in series. No 'teacher' involvement in comments / questions. Mistakes within quizzes. Both practice and rated. | in comments / questions. Mistakes within | Quizz | Both practice and rated. | Positive | 0.71 | 0.0 | 1.06 | 1.07 |
| SG_K6nEmEeWxvQr3acyajw | Good content, but blocked quizes in free version is bad idea. | Good content, but blocked | Quizz | in free version is bad idea. | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 1.06 | 1.07 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This course was tough, but I dont mind a challenge. But what I found frustrating about this course was that first the quizzes were often inconsistent with the lecture material, the TA's were less helpful than my fellow classmates (without whom I would not have made it through the course) and the final was an IMMENSE challenge that took over my life for about 1 week - despite the calculation by the instructors that it would take 6-8 hours. I did give it a few stars because I honestly did learn things I did not know, and I understand the value of the application of what was taught for modern businesses. I have been informed that the course is being reviewed by the instructors for strengthening and I 100% agree with that direction. | this course was that first the | Quizz | were often inconsistent with the lecture | Negative | -0.72 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Concepts are fantastic but the material developed to deliver the course is short of expectations, especially from a university. Excel sheets do not match what is demonstrated in video lectures, lots of confusion around how to complete tasks, quiz answer options not being correct, and missing Excel spreadsheets (e.g. video lecture says to refer to accompanying excel spreadsheet, but no spreadsheet available). Also, judging from past discussions by students, some inconsistencies around formulas being presented in video lectures versus assignment questions. could have been a great course, but the inconsistencies have made is very disappointing. | confusion around how to complete tasks, | Quizz | answer options not being correct, and | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Interesting statistical concepts, and great theory. However, the lectures and the quizzes do not prepare the student well for the final project. | theory. However, the lectures and the | Quizz | do not prepare the student well | Negative | -0.73 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The title is very misleading. Excel is an afterthought for this course; instead there is a heavy focus on statistics. The class claims to be for beginners, but that is clearly not the case, as it requires previous knowledge in inferential statistics and calculus. Excel is hardly used and is certainly not the focus; there are weeks where Excel is not used at all. There are no practice assignments, only quizzes. It's clear that this course is outdated and poorly maintained, as the videos refer to examples that are not included or content that was not presented. Needless to say, I will not be taking any other courses in this specialization. | There are no practice assignments, only | Quizz | It's clear that this course is | Negative | -0.72 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The course structure is not thoughtfully prepared. There is a lot of confusion around what the instructor wants to say. The practice quizzes and course content have no match whatsoever | instructor wants to say. The practice | Quizz | and course content have no match | Negative | -0.86 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This class required far too much independent study. The instructor did not provide enough instruction or reading material to complete the quiz each week. There was too much focus on the conceptual data with very little emphasis on practical application of the material. | or reading material to complete the | Quizz | each week. There was too much | Negative | -0.93 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The class has great concept but it needs a bit more structure and change to hit its full potential. The Good:-The spreadsheets and exercises along with Quiz material. The project was also very informative. The Bad:- The video need to better explain how Area Under Curve and how the Credit model make sense. It was not very intuitive and I struggled for over 2 weeks to put the Project together due to this gap. But a worthwhile class with great potential. I am glad I took it. | Good:-The spreadsheets and exercises along with | Quizz | material. The project was also very | Positive | 0.97 | 0.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | This is my first Coursera course and I wasn't sure what to expect. I was hoping for a good experience but preparing myself for mediocrity. I finished the course at 2am on Monday morning and I've been really impressed, both with the Coursera "infrastructure" and with the quality of the teaching from Daniel Egger and his team. I live in South Africa where tertiary educational standards vary widely, and appear to be on the decline. More and more, we are going to need MOOCs like this from the best universities in the world. More specifically, relating to this course, I found the video lectures well presented and the quizzes thoughtfully prepared. The Excel models really helped with grasping the concepts and practice. A couple of suggestions: a) The course FAQ makes light of the background knowledge necessary to cope with the course. It needs to be more honest about the need for mathematics and statistics. Linear regression is not for sissies, in my opinion. b) Please tell us at the START of the course that we should attack the project week by week. This advice isn't (unless I missed something) given until you open the week 6 project. Ahem... it's too late by then! I spent a very frantic 4 nights last week crunching the project work, 4 quizzes and the assignment. I got to bed at 2.30am, and i'm not a night owl. Overwhelmingly though, a really interesting course. I'm already starting the next one. | video lectures well presented and the | Quizz | thoughtfully prepared. The Excel models really | Positive | 0.85 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Don't be fooled by how detailed and clear the first weeks videos are. The second thru the final weeks are lacking details and explanations and found myself lost during most of the videos. There were even a few typos and errors. Be ready to do a lot independent research and learning from other sources in order to complete the weekly quiz. I was unable to complete the final project of this course due to the lack of knowledge provided by the lecture videos and some of own research. I was hoping to complete the specialization for this, but it doesn't seem like this course provided me with enough to proceed. ** The use of excel on the weekly basis was poorly integrated with the flow of the course. | in order to complete the weekly | Quizz | I was unable to complete the | Negative | -0.66 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | The lecture videos are not super helpful and the instruction and support for final project is somewhat lacking. You need a relatively solid background coming into doing the project beforehand. Just study the course material is not enough for you to complete your final project, in fact you need peer help or to read more materials to fully understand and finish the project. The quizzes compared to what is asked in the project is too simple and thus not constructive enough in the overall learning. Overall I would recommend you to have a solid background before proceed with this course if you want to improve your learning experiences. | understand and finish the project. The | Quizz | compared to what is asked in | Negative | -0.64 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | In the course info this is described as the first course in the series and that it requires no prior knowledge but the first week quiz contains questions referring to an equation 'discussed in the previous course'. | prior knowledge but the first week | Quizz | contains questions referring to an equation | Negative | -0.62 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Was very frustrated with this course. Does not have a strong emphasis on Excel skills and the statistics models provided seem to be randomly chosen and poorly explained. Quizzes were interesting, but time-consuming because of the necessary extra research outside of provided lectures. | be randomly chosen and poorly explained. | Quizz | were interesting, but time-consuming because of | Negative | -1.0 | -1.0 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Quite an useful course for Excel application in business decision-making. But I think the final project is a little more difficult than weekly assignments. And only Quiz 1 has some hints about the potential problems we might come across during the quiz. The linear regression part, especially multivariate linear regression, need more explanations how to derive the matrix in Excel. Even though I followed every steps and referred other classmates' discussions, I cannot work out the matrix with Excel. So sad :( | difficult than weekly assignments. And only | Quizz | 1 has some hints about the | Negative | -0.78 | 0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Videos fine. Quizes impossible to understand unless you take previous courses and have time to go through forums and more extra staff. It takes a lot of time. Not suggested unless you have it. | Videos fine. | Quizz | impossible to understand unless you take | Negative | -0.96 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | Much work needs to be done on this course to make it friendly to learners. The quizzes and assignments do not align with what is taught in the lessons. Further, the content in the lessons does not even show or explain what is expected from the learning. I spent the majority of my time exploring the discussions to discover what I was supposed to be doing and the rest of it on Google teaching myself the concepts that were not taught in the course. | make it friendly to learners. The | Quizz | and assignments do not align with | Negative | -0.67 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| SpO4HBnoEeWjrA6seF25aw | It has a lot of problems, including: Not so many lectures about excel itself - most of the time you will be watching videos about statistic methods. The lectures are very superficial, even though the quizzes and projects demand a lot of knowledge and time. The course seems to have a staff of one man: the professor of the course rarely replies (even though he did at the beginning of the session) and all the work seems to be done by his assistant, who tries his best, but ends up not coping with all the questions asked at the discussion forums. | are very superficial, even though the | Quizz | and projects demand a lot of | Positive | 0.79 | -0.5 | 0.71 | 1.1 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | I've only taken 2 classes with Wharton online. This and Intro to financial accounting. Financial accounting is awesome. It taught smoothly and explained things well. This class jumped around and didn't give full explanations and had questions on one quiz that we didn't learn until the next week. | explanations and had questions on one | Quizz | that we didn't learn until the | Negative | -0.63 | -0.5 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course does not belong to this specialization. Poor content, poor assessment quiz, and felt quite disappointed. It is way below par. I never thought I would have to rate it this bad. If not for specialization that I am aiming for, I would never take it. Period. | this specialization. Poor content, poor assessment | Quizz | and felt quite disappointed. It is | Negative | -0.99 | -1.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | the quiz is so frustrating | the | Quizz | is so frustrating | Negative | -0.64 | -0.5 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | It's a good course, with quite a bit for a newbie to learn. Would have appreciated more in-depth examples in the lectures though, as I often found a gap in the lectures and the questions asked in the quiz. Even otherwise, good stuff. | and the questions asked in the | Quizz | Even otherwise, good stuff. | Negative | -0.69 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecture was quite good but some questions of the quiz made me confused, maybe it can be written in a different expression. | good but some questions of the | Quizz | made me confused, maybe it can | Negative | -0.86 | 1.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Wharton's online MD can not have a course so poorly develop (lectures vs quiz vs material) | course so poorly develop (lectures vs | Quizz | vs material) | Negative | -0.99 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Frankly speaking, it should be the most disappointing MOOC I have ever enrolled so far. The Professor's teaching is clear and comprehensible but the depth of the course content cannot meet the university level, especially from a worldwide renowned school like Wharton. Quiz is the most terrible part which seems like nobody could get it because of the ambiguous questions and paranoid answer area. Personally, I, like many other mates, am really grateful to Coursera for offering everyone this equal opportunity. But courses with that kind of quality but staggering price will destroy the company's brand. We all want Coursera to go further and better, but few people prefer monopoly businessman rather than prestigious professors and diligent intellectuals. | a worldwide renowned school like Wharton. | Quizz | is the most terrible part which | Positive | 0.62 | -1.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecturer was very slow, and some things were not explained very well (while very simple concepts were often over-explained). Also, I'm quite sure there were at least 2 errors in the weekly quizzes. One that comes to mind is a question that had identical options for two of the multiple-choice answers, but only one of them was correct (50/50 guess, more or less --- I had to take the quiz 3 times before I guessed right!). | least 2 errors in the weekly | Quizz | One that comes to mind is | Negative | -0.85 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | The lecturer was very slow, and some things were not explained very well (while very simple concepts were often over-explained). Also, I'm quite sure there were at least 2 errors in the weekly quizzes. One that comes to mind is a question that had identical options for two of the multiple-choice answers, but only one of them was correct (50/50 guess, more or less --- I had to take the quiz 3 times before I guessed right!). | --- I had to take the | Quizz | 3 times before I guessed right! | Negative | -0.89 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Many errors in the quizzes made this course a disaster, although the course staff was eager to correct them as more complains in the discussions arrived. Being the second course in the specialisation, it doesn't actually live up to the expectations as it mostly covers the very basics of the excel functionality in terms of modelling. | Many errors in the | Quizz | made this course a disaster, although | Negative | -0.84 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Overall the course was good, but the quiz assignments need work. When entering formula's there should be more clarity. Formula's can be entered in many ways and even when right were often counted as wrong. | the course was good, but the | Quizz | assignments need work. When entering formula's | Negative | -0.76 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | stars. On the other hand, the | Quizz | were very poorly designed. It took | Negative | -0.98 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | maximum three tries on every single | Quizz | to pass and I did just | Negative | -0.9 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | Also, there were questions on the | Quizz | that weren't even covered in the | Negative | -0.78 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | What to say about this course? On the one hand, I learned a lot which merits the three stars. On the other hand, the quizzes were very poorly designed. It took me the maximum three tries on every single quiz to pass and I did just barely. Hey, this is EXCEL, not advanced calculus! Also, there were questions on the quiz that weren't even covered in the particular module. E.g., on quiz #1, there was a question about "objective functions" which the instructor didn't explain until the last course module. There were times when I questioned my own sanity until I read in the course discussions that others were experiencing the same issues. Before presenting this course again, TEST, TEST, TEST the quizzes and answers!! And if you're not going to allow for a range of correct answers or formatting variances, then change all questions to multiple choice where there's (maybe) a fighting chance of passing. I am immensely relieved this course is done and I can move on to the next one in the specialization--hoping it's better organized as was the Fundamentals course that Richard Waterman taught. I was fearful that a course in Excel was going to doom me for the rest of the specialization. Last recommendation: improve the presentation materials. Provide more details for reference purposes. Okay, I'm going to go relax, now, to recover from this trying experience.... | particular module. E. g. , on | Quizz | #1, there was a question about | Negative | -0.73 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course was very average to me. Compared to the first course in the specialization, Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling, which was absolutely great. What I liked: Good info on the tools in excel that are needed. What I didn't like: Time spent on content that necessarily wasn't regarding models; the critical material was buried in videos and was very brief. More time should have been spent. Additionally the quiz questions were subjective at times based on what was said on video and the formula answers weren't correctly graded in many cases. This course could have been much better, maybe I was just spoiled by the first course. | should have been spent. Additionally the | Quizz | questions were subjective at times based | Negative | -0.92 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This course needs tremendous improvement. In contrast to previous fundamentals of quantitative modelling module, this lags in lot of areas. No clear explanations and the quizzes are worded super vague and filled with with bugs. I expected a lot under Monte Carlo Simulation. However, too simplistic example and explanation was presented. The topics were not introduced clearly. | areas. No clear explanations and the | Quizz | are worded super vague and filled | Negative | -0.74 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | Poor quize | Poor | Quizz | | Negative | -0.77 | 0.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tAfppJ3KEeWoKRLkmmHLTQ | This was very disappointing, especially considering it's a Wharton product. The "course" was little more than an afternoon's worth of seminars. Since I am not a paying participant, I could not take the quizzes, so I finished watching the videos in less than a day. In addition, there are NO collateral or supporting materials provided. None of the spreadsheets or workbooks illustrated in the videos are available anywhere on the course site, despite their being advertised in the videos. All in all, it was consistent with the first course in this "specialization". Again, very disappointing. I'm glad I didn't spend any money on this. | participant, I could not take the | Quizz | so I finished watching the videos | Negative | -0.95 | -1.0 | 0.41 | 0.93 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | A strong overview of the crisis that balances the depth and breadth of the material well. Strengths: Balance of narrative and data. Logical sequencing gives a nice structure and a more digestible package. Excellent level of detail, neither missing the forest for the trees nor ignoring the trees altogether. Weaknesses: Does not address alternative theories or interpretations of the crisis, even to shoot them down. Several quizzes were poorly-constructed, featuring obvious typos or nonsensical statements. Additional module to update the material (stale since mid-2015) was promised, but not delivered. | even to shoot them down. Several | Quizz | were poorly-constructed, featuring obvious typos or | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.99 | 1.17 |
| tjqUXz-5EeWpogr5ZO8qxQ | This was a great course. It was very well structured and the quizzes after each lecture were useful for quickly catching my own misunderstandings about the material presented. I learned so much from it and it really changed my perspective on the global financial crisis. My only complaint is that there no guidance on where to get supplementary information, either books or articles, on the topic. | was very well structured and the | Quizz | after each lecture were useful for | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.99 | 1.17 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Quiz isn't challenging enough to validate the understanding of the user taking the course . | | Quizz | isn't challenging enough to validate the | Negative | -0.84 | 0.0 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I had some issues with this course which is why I rated it a 2. First off, let me start by saying this is a very good overview of what the Cybersecurity Terms are, but I wish it went deeper into the subject. 1. Having to pay just to take the quizzes for an overview course is kind of a joke. I could see asking for money if you went into more detail information regarding each lesson, but just telling me what each term means and then pointing me to a website, then asking for 50 bucks is kind of cheap considering no in-depth information was ever given. 2. Why did you have all of those people that are in the field of cybersecurity just read off a list of terms? You could have done that, kind of a waste of time for those other people. I am guessing that you had to pay them. Which would explain why you are asking 50 dollars just to take the quizzes. 3. Where was the real life experience? Explain to me the most common mistakes people make with each of the different type of networks as securities. That would at least be worth 50 dollars, for some real world practical use. I could have easily googled these terms and have in the past. I thought it would contain more detailed information about the subject considering is technically an online course. | to pay just to take the | Quizz | for an overview course is kind | Negative | -0.69 | -0.5 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I had some issues with this course which is why I rated it a 2. First off, let me start by saying this is a very good overview of what the Cybersecurity Terms are, but I wish it went deeper into the subject. 1. Having to pay just to take the quizzes for an overview course is kind of a joke. I could see asking for money if you went into more detail information regarding each lesson, but just telling me what each term means and then pointing me to a website, then asking for 50 bucks is kind of cheap considering no in-depth information was ever given. 2. Why did you have all of those people that are in the field of cybersecurity just read off a list of terms? You could have done that, kind of a waste of time for those other people. I am guessing that you had to pay them. Which would explain why you are asking 50 dollars just to take the quizzes. 3. Where was the real life experience? Explain to me the most common mistakes people make with each of the different type of networks as securities. That would at least be worth 50 dollars, for some real world practical use. I could have easily googled these terms and have in the past. I thought it would contain more detailed information about the subject considering is technically an online course. | 50 dollars just to take the | Quizz | 3. Where was the real life | Negative | -0.74 | -0.5 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | The course is for an overview of many aspects of cybersecurity. There are many resources to read, videos that briefly discuss concepts of the week. Then there are quizzes and discussions with the topic of the week, doing the possibility at the student to talk about that and post his idea for assimilate concepts and reaching goals of the course. This is useful also for discuss with other students and how your ideas is viewed. I think there is a very basic course in his entire length, with more reading lectures at academic or professional level not for a beginner. it can be adding videos with more length and in-depth that in a easy way the ten domain about cybersecurity. | of the week. Then there are | Quizz | and discussions with the topic of | Negative | -0.69 | -0.5 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | Interesting course ... final quiz is a little bit going deep into details | Interesting course . . . final | Quizz | is a little bit going deep | Positive | 0.95 | 0.5 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| tWgmnb03EeS5IyIACyCAHg | I find this course very informative, but at the same time the videos seem pointless. All the quizzes are on the suggested reading material. The videos are quite cursory- almost an afterthought. | the videos seem pointless. All the | Quizz | are on the suggested reading material. | Negative | -0.93 | 0.0 | 0.61 | 0.89 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This is an excellent overview of the issues surrounding sustainable development. Some of the content needs updating, in particular with relation to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, some of the quiz answers are incorrect based on the data referred to and the resources appear to have been updated since the course was written. There is nobody monitoring the forum and addressing issues raised. | Development Goals. Furthermore, some of the | Quizz | answers are incorrect based on the | Positive | 0.76 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Some questions in the quiz do not have the proper data sources. Please review quiz questions, sources and answers expected. Thank you very much for this learning opportunity.< Sincere thanks and deep admiration and gratitude to Prof. Sachs for his genuine, continuous contributions to society. He is a true insporation to me. Kind regards, yullie matsouka | Some questions in the | Quizz | do not have the proper data | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Some questions in the quiz do not have the proper data sources. Please review quiz questions, sources and answers expected. Thank you very much for this learning opportunity.< Sincere thanks and deep admiration and gratitude to Prof. Sachs for his genuine, continuous contributions to society. He is a true insporation to me. Kind regards, yullie matsouka | the proper data sources. Please review | Quizz | questions, sources and answers expected. Thank | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Excellent course content but very poorly designed quizzes. More clarity is needed in formulating questions, since different pages have different values for the same data sets (even on the same website such as the World Bank indicator datasets) and it will be difficult for students to get the right answers. | course content but very poorly designed | Quizz | More clarity is needed in formulating | Negative | -0.98 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | The course itself is excellent. I just wished they got rid of the zooming in on graphs. Also, there is some issues with making the quizzes depend on web links that change over time. | is some issues with making the | Quizz | depend on web links that change | Positive | 0.67 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | I really enjoyed how expert Professor Sachs is on sustainable development. He seems to know a lot about the subject and we can see a spark on his eyes when he is teaching. Moreover, the lectures and quizzes are comprehensive and well organized. However, apart from the last Week, I think that solutions for the many problems that Professor Sachs presents are not showed properly. Although there are many issues unsolved, there may be a lot of good examples throughout the world to be presented together with these issues. Kind Regards, Rodolfo | is teaching. Moreover, the lectures and | Quizz | are comprehensive and well organized. However, | Positive | 0.97 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course proves to be very informative, and the quizzes push to discover new sources for course material. However, it is highly focused on the programs set by the UN and could provide more solutions and feedbacks on what is being done. Very much oriented toward public policies. Good experience overall. | to be very informative, and the | Quizz | push to discover new sources for | Positive | 0.84 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | Very good course, I enjoyed it very much and appreciated the educated and polite style of Prof. Jeffrey Sachs. I would have appreciated a copy of the figures and grafique shown. The course release in 2012 would need to be updated. The Quizz need a real involvement of the student to be completed; challenging but I personnaly appreaciated very much. The Quizz would need some profound revision since some links are not available anymore and some answer are simply wrong. A Statement from the Columbia University / Prof. J. Sachs would have been welcome since completing the 14 week course imply a real involvement from the student. Overall very appreciated course, Thank Prof. Sachs! | I personnaly appreaciated very much. The | Quizz | would need some profound revision since | Positive | 0.93 | 0.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | At first, i didn't know what to expect; i thought it was going to be pretty hard, because of my lack of experience in that specific area. It turns out that every lesson is perfectly explained,the quizzes are not easy tough! Highly recommended! | every lesson is perfectly explained, the | Quizz | are not easy tough! Highly recommended! | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | I really enjoyed this course. Very fluid, well organized and well-present. In my opinion, quizzes should not contain questions referring to the book, because not everyone (like me) can afford buying it. I would enjoy if Prof. Sachs could go deeper in the topics and explore them a little bit more and make student´s job a little bit more difficult. | organized and well-present. In my opinion, | Quizz | should not contain questions referring to | Positive | 0.73 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course is wonderfully and engagingly taught by the great Jeffrey Sachs, with a lot of food for thought, excellent visual aids, relevant data and statistics, and supplementary readings which add a lot to the course. The quizzes not only test the knowledge found in the lectures, but ask the students to analyze other data from sources such as the UN and World Bank. Overall, a holistic and information-packed introduction to the field of sustainable development. | a lot to the course. The | Quizz | not only test the knowledge found | Positive | 0.89 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | This course is pretty much what i expected from an online course. I just rate it with four stars because: 1. Quiz questions are often just about interpreting world bank data and not about the contents of the course. 2. Having read Prof. Sachs book the course does not offer additional insights. | it with four stars because: 1. | Quizz | questions are often just about interpreting | Negative | -0.72 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| T_hpstgKEeSA2iIAC22KLw | In this course there is a lot of valuable information, well prepared lessons and readings. I would try to make quizzes more complicated. | readings. I would try to make | Quizz | more complicated. | Negative | -0.67 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.09 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | The course would be great if only everybody could fully participate. As I cannot pass quizzes and submit assignments not having purchased it, I have less motivation to carry on :( | fully participate. As I cannot pass | Quizz | and submit assignments not having purchased | Positive | 0.72 | 0.0 | 1.07 | 1.07 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | I learned a great deal with this course and have become more confident in photography. There are a few little problems with the quizzes, but considering this is the first time the course is offered, that is quite normal. | a few little problems with the | Quizz | but considering this is the first | Negative | -0.7 | 1.0 | 1.07 | 1.07 |
| U-SKLJVlEeWF6gpQJiw6hQ | very dissapointing to not be able to make the quizzes and the assigments without paying it | not be able to make the | Quizz | and the assigments without paying it | Negative | -0.79 | -1.0 | 1.07 | 1.07 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Too much version specific details. Instructor was reading slides vs explaining the technologies ( telling a story ) The Quiz part cant be more lame | ( telling a story ) The | Quizz | part cant be more lame | Negative | -0.91 | -1.0 | 1.04 | 1.09 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | Good intro, but the quizzes could be more challenging. | Good intro, but the | Quizz | could be more challenging. | Negative | -0.63 | 0.5 | 1.04 | 1.09 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | This is an excellent course to get some basic knowledge about the iOS and Android history, when and how this systems developed their unique features, or how that influenced products in whole. Yet, quizzes are a bit boring. They require you to actually know history of evolving features tied to exact dates/versions. | that influenced products in whole. Yet, | Quizz | are a bit boring. They require | Positive | 0.81 | 0.5 | 1.04 | 1.09 |
| UA9HkQ8QEeWuEBJhzy2uFw | It was a great course. The integration of quizes during videos is a great Idea. It keeps you interested. Great teacher as well. | a great course. The integration of | Quizz | during videos is a great Idea. | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 1.04 | 1.09 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | This class isn't very good. It is confusing and not well explained, and the quizzes are too short and badly written. I gave up on week 5 (of 6) because I just didn't feel i was learning very much, particularly about what the title of the course would suggest you'd be learning about. | and not well explained, and the | Quizz | are too short and badly written. | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I didn't understand very much of this course. Instructor relies heavily on the use of various charts. They were seldom explained in a way I could understand. Instructor seemed to believe that underlining things in the charts served as an explanation. After completing the entire course & listening to many of the lessons several times, I can't tell you "what we like to hear and why". Instructor speaks in a monotone with no emotion. Seems bored stiff. Seems like he's just talking, but his mind is elsewhere. Quizzes frequently contained questions for material to be covered in a future lesson | talking, but his mind is elsewhere. | Quizz | frequently contained questions for material to | Negative | -0.63 | -1.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | I slogged through it and got an 89, but the videos were boring and the quizzes were poorly worded and should have had greater correlation with the course content. | the videos were boring and the | Quizz | were poorly worded and should have | Negative | -1.0 | -1.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Potentially interesting and useful material presented in boring and sometimes unclear manner. Quizzes failed to correlate to the material in the lectures. Got something out of the course but the potential was there for much more. | in boring and sometimes unclear manner. | Quizz | failed to correlate to the material | Negative | -0.98 | 0.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The course was alright in the sense that it was descriptive, however, the level of critical thinking suggested for the course was not actually indicative of the material presented. A lot of the material presented was great, but when the quiz came around, questions regarding the material were unequal. For example, in one quiz, there was a question about Galileo, but there was no mention of Galileo in the lecture for that week, and, a lot of the PDF'S were repetitive and not diverse in the material being taught. | presented was great, but when the | Quizz | came around, questions regarding the material | Positive | 0.69 | 0.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The course was alright in the sense that it was descriptive, however, the level of critical thinking suggested for the course was not actually indicative of the material presented. A lot of the material presented was great, but when the quiz came around, questions regarding the material were unequal. For example, in one quiz, there was a question about Galileo, but there was no mention of Galileo in the lecture for that week, and, a lot of the PDF'S were repetitive and not diverse in the material being taught. | were unequal. For example, in one | Quizz | there was a question about Galileo, | Negative | -0.87 | 0.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content was interesting, but the quizzes didn't relate to the lectures very often. It was as if there was a major piece missing in this course. One of the questions even referenced a book that was never mentioned or made available. Also, several of the musical sections seemed to be in the wrong place. I think maybe this is one of the classes that doesn't work well in this format. | The content was interesting, but the | Quizz | didn't relate to the lectures very | Negative | -0.99 | -0.5 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The material in this course is very interesting, and many of the musical demonstrations are extremely helpful. I am glad I took it. However, much of the most interesting material is poorly explained; I would loved if fewer ideas were covered in more depth. The quizzes were for the most part poorly written, and only somewhat correlated with the presentation of material in the lectures. So there is definitely much room for improvement. | were covered in more depth. The | Quizz | were for the most part poorly | Negative | -0.88 | 0.0 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | Good video content, but quizzes need to be revised. | Good video content, but | Quizz | need to be revised. | Negative | -0.68 | 0.5 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content is great. But there's not a lot of activity on the discussion boards, and there are some technical issues with the quizzes (using future lesson material on current quizzes). But the content is really fascinating. | are some technical issues with the | Quizz | (using future lesson material on current | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| ujxZm0T9EeWhnQozdayc-w | The content is great. But there's not a lot of activity on the discussion boards, and there are some technical issues with the quizzes (using future lesson material on current quizzes). But the content is really fascinating. | (using future lesson material on current | Quizz | But the content is really fascinating. | Positive | 0.81 | 0.5 | 0.85 | 0.99 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | Great content and great teacher. But I found the assignments and the quizzes not that great. I reckon the questions and corrections were a bit subjective and time consuming. | I found the assignments and the | Quizz | not that great. I reckon the | Negative | -0.96 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.96 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The course was very superficial, mostly with tips and hints. It's good to be aware that the option for performing the quizes and tasks were unavailable, making it hard to evaluate the experience of the course fully. | that the option for performing the | Quizz | and tasks were unavailable, making it | Positive | 0.83 | -0.5 | 0.78 | 0.96 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | The information in this course was valuable, but the assignments were poorly integrated with the course. The types of documents assigned were either not covered or barely covered in the course leaving the students to guess what was expected. For one assignment the provided template left off a section required in the grading criteria. The quizes were also poorly tied to the lecture material and some of the questions were ambiguous. There were several quizes were a single wrong answer resulted in having to take the quiz over. | required in the grading criteria. The | Quizz | were also poorly tied to the | Negative | -0.87 | 0.0 | 0.78 | 0.96 |
| urbm-CT-EeWCGRL6mLoB5w | This course tries to cover the many aspects around the games industry. But the coverage in each of the subject is not deep enough to be useful. For example, the instructor talks about project management, public speaking, how to write a resume etc. The instructor starts by talking about why they are useful, and then followed by one to two 10-15 minutes long video lectures. Each of these could worth a full Coursera course and I am sure the other courses have better coverage than in this course. The quiz questions are not well thought and do not stimulate thinking at all. Some of the "correct" answers are personal opinions but you have to choose them in order to pass the quiz. The third peer grading assessment asks students to post a video either to pitch himself/herself or to pitch the game the student makes. However, the specialization up to this point does not equip student with the skills beyond the basics. Unless you are already in the industry, I do not think anyone can make anything impressive to be worth pitching in front of the audience. | them in order to pass the | Quizz | The third peer grading assessment asks | Negative | -0.84 | -0.5 | 0.78 | 0.96 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | Sorry but yet again a potentially great course spoiled by the implementation, way too many mistakes in the quizzes, peer review grading systems which in places are nonsense . I hope things get better and I give the the course the 5 stars the content would merit if it had been properly QCed and delivered to best Coursera standards | way too many mistakes in the | Quizz | peer review grading systems which in | Negative | -0.98 | 0.0 | 0.75 | 0.92 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | many hiccups with the videos and | Quizz | I would recommend this course. However, | Positive | 1.0 | -0.5 | 0.75 | 0.92 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | If there hadn't been so many hiccups with the videos and quizzes I would recommend this course. However, I lost a great deal of time viewing incomplete videos and trying to complete quizzes covering material that was not addressed or only partially addressed in the videos. Then had to go back and Review all the videos once they had been re-uploaded. It was a very frustrating experience. I lost momentum and even motivation and as a result am now behind with the assignments and quizzes. | incomplete videos and trying to complete | Quizz | covering material that was not addressed | Negative | -0.89 | -0.5 | 0.75 | 0.92 |
| UYzGkJfFEeWqkw5zNB248Q | The explanations are a bit and drawn out. For non-native English speakers, this is very difficult to understand as well at time difficult for native speakers. Also, the course for auditors is not very interactive and we cannot participate in some quizzes and work submission. | and we cannot participate in some | Quizz | and work submission. | Negative | -0.62 | 0.0 | 0.75 | 0.92 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course disappointed me. I expected to receive knowledge about negotiation. But it's more advertisement for the book. I did every step in the course until the quiz and the quiz asks for knowledge which wasn't in the course. I assume that i should have read the book to be prepared to do the quiz. That's not why i registered on coursera. | course until the quiz and the | Quizz | asks for knowledge which wasn't in | Positive | 0.68 | -1.0 | 1.17 | 1.19 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | This course disappointed me. I expected to receive knowledge about negotiation. But it's more advertisement for the book. I did every step in the course until the quiz and the quiz asks for knowledge which wasn't in the course. I assume that i should have read the book to be prepared to do the quiz. That's not why i registered on coursera. | to be prepared to do the | Quizz | That's not why i registered on | Negative | -0.82 | -1.0 | 1.17 | 1.19 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Good material and final. Quizzes at the end of each week would be helpful. Also, the videos could have been quite a bit shorter. | Good material and final. | Quizz | at the end of each week | Positive | 0.77 | 0.0 | 1.17 | 1.19 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | Very good! It's my 2nd course on Coursera after "Learning how to learn" and I supposed to meet small quizes after each unit, just to remember the material better. | and I supposed to meet small | Quizz | after each unit, just to remember | Negative | -0.97 | 1.0 | 1.17 | 1.19 |
| v0l76HmGEeSi3yIACzSGcw | The course is very and very good and usefull, but it's easier for the attendants to take the quiz by the end of each Module and do the final test shorter (about 10-15 questions are enough) | for the attendants to take the | Quizz | by the end of each Module | Positive | 0.78 | 1.0 | 1.17 | 1.19 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course is the worst one in this specialization. The lecture and quizzes are so boring. | in this specialization. The lecture and | Quizz | are so boring. | Negative | -0.99 | -0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | I feel that the lecture material lacks proper explanation of the key concepts but the questions in quizzes are good although the lectures should have been more conceptual rather than theoretical | key concepts but the questions in | Quizz | are good although the lectures should | Positive | 0.73 | -0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The Course material and method of testing the understanding of the student needs to be improved. Despite the low quality of the quizzes, the course is very inspiring. The examples showed are very good and the lectures concentrated on teaching the underlying concept rather the Mathematics involved, which was refreshing. | Despite the low quality of the | Quizz | the course is very inspiring. The | Negative | -0.72 | 0.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course was very good, but I guess there were too many quizzes, and the instructions / questions in the quizzes and other assignments are not unambiguous. That could be improved. Other than that I liked the course and the specialization very much. | I guess there were too many | Quizz | and the instructions / questions in | Negative | -1.0 | 0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The material in the quizzes is not adequately described in the lectures or notes. Some of the quizzes require 100% to complete with some problems being quite difficult. Most importantly, I do not believe the course leaves behind an effective understanding of the material that would allow you to apply it. I thought the aerial course was much better. | The material in the | Quizz | is not adequately described in the | Negative | -0.67 | -0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | videos and the questions in the | Quizz | Also a lot of time the | Positive | 0.63 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course, was really bad structured, was often the discrepancy between the information provided in the videos and the questions in the Quiz. Also a lot of time the system was very picky to take an answer like correct, just because the format used, for example e!=E in one equation, and because this was necessary a lot of guessing in order to find how the system take the answer by correct. But really the worst was the discrepancy between the video and the quiz, because my impression is that the videos were cut to fix in the time, but they were cut a lot, missing important information to be used in the quiz. | discrepancy between the video and the | Quizz | because my impression is that the | Negative | -0.69 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the quizzes. There are 24 graded | Quizz | in total, to pass the course | Negative | -0.93 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the minimum passing marks for each | Quizz | is 80%, that wouldn't have been | Negative | -0.72 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | been such an issue if most | Quizz | had 5 or more questions, which | Negative | -0.69 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | not the case, most of the | Quizz | have 4 or less questions. This | Negative | -0.73 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | miss only one question in a | Quizz | with 3 questions there's already no | Negative | -0.87 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | the course! The content of each | Quizz | is also very troublesome, we are | Positive | 0.99 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | 8-hour period between attempts at the | Quizz | only hindered my progress. I was | Negative | -0.76 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This is the worst course online I've done so far. I would not recommend it to anyone as it stands, regardless of the student's background, this course is just poor and lacking. The premise of this course is a promising one, the topic is still in its infancy and seems very interesting. Having said that, this is about everything positive that I can say about this course. For starters, the videos seem good at first, but later it becomes very superficial and monotone. The content is many times just rushed through and it's visible that the lecturers at several occasions have difficulty even to read their own slides! However, the worst part of the course are the quizzes. There are 24 graded quizzes in total, to pass the course you need to pass all 24 of them! To make matters worse, the minimum passing marks for each quiz is 80%, that wouldn't have been such an issue if most quizzes had 5 or more questions, which is not the case, most of the quizzes have 4 or less questions. This is such an unreasonable requirement, if you miss only one question in a quiz with 3 questions there's already no chance to pass the course! The content of each quiz is also very troublesome, we are essentially being graded for trivia, a considerable number of the questions are very superficially related to not related at all to the subject of each lecture. Instead of using the questions to delve deeper into the topic at hand, they only create confusion with futilities. A little example, the topic of a subject was about the mechanical properties of using multiple templates and a question in its quiz was about an electric circuit that is never shown in the question itself, only briefly shown in the lecture video for about 10s, minimal information is given without any explanation of what they mean and we are asked to enter a formula as the answer for which also almost no information is given about which notation we should use for the formula itself. There are other cases where there are multiple choice questions which have incorrect answers accepted by the grader. In one instance, two of the options available are contradictory to each other, however the accepted answer was the one involving both. In another instance, there was more than one solution available to an answer, however the grader accepted only one and there was no information in the question itself to narrow down the possible answers to the desired one. Finally, there is no active community by the TA and professors, I have never had a single answer form a TA or professor, only sporadical replies from a mentor, who has no authority to fix any issue by him or herself. All these issues just point to how poorly this course was designed. It had such high hopes, but they fell short flat. In doing this course, I found myself reverse engineering most of the questions just to try to find an accepted answer and try to understand what it meant. The imposed 8-hour period between attempts at the quizzes only hindered my progress. I was focused and engaged in studying for each quiz, however, after 3 failed attempts I had an imposed break period that makes little sense. In the end, this course only made me feel like the very object of my learning: a robot. I am really disappointed with this course. | and engaged in studying for each | Quizz | however, after 3 failed attempts I | Negative | -0.63 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | A tough course,yet agood one if you are persistent. The materials and some Quizzes seems out of touch,you will be searching all over the web for answers because the lectures simply wont have those answers,This is a fairly high level intro to mobility ,you must be persistent .to complete this . | are persistent. The materials and some | Quizz | seems out of touch, you will | Positive | 0.88 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | This course covers very interesting topics, but there are some serious shortcomings in the lectures. Too much information is just omitted or taken for granted. Some of the lecturers are rather inexperienced. Reading or reciting mathematical expressions in a monotonous voice without actually pointing to the visual representation of the lecture material makes it very difficult to follow. Better care should also be taken with the quizzes - if one looks at the comments or questions posted by some learners, it is clear that we simply don't understand the question, or a question is answered correctly in essence , but the quizz expected more (or less) precision without stating so . Finally for some reason the support from Technical Advisors was also lacking in the specific session that I did, contributing to my frustration and rather negative experience of what could be a very good course | should also be taken with the | Quizz | - if one looks at the | Positive | 0.83 | -0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Although main teacher looks very cult, I wonder how there are so many mistakes in this course. The first one that don't looks like a hands on matlab tutorial as the others i have taken. Some unclear questions in quizzes. Some mistaken or unclear math in video and quizzes. Looks like no staff is following the course. Some people complain about this. Too many references and resource papers require payment, and not everyone's university or school have them available, they are just too expensive. | or unclear math in video and | Quizz | Looks like no staff is following | Negative | -0.94 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | useless and most of the time | Quizz | are note related with them. In | Negative | -0.78 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | with them. In order to solve | Quizz | you have not only to recover | Positive | 0.97 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Despite the arguments of this module are extremely interesting and very useful for Robotics, I think the way they are treated is very poor. In my opinion lectures are so superficial that it is almost a waste of time to follow them. Lectures are completely useless and most of the time quizzes are note related with them. In order to solve quizzes you have not only to recover prior knowledge, that it is obvious, but also to search for new arguments somwhere in the web, in some other courses where contents are better treated and explained. In that contest what are the quizzes, what should quizzes have to test if no content is given? Moreover it often happen that without a clear support from the lectures, questions are confused and ambiguous. It is quite difficult to follow the teaching path and to enrich my knowledge. I think it is a very bad way to make a course and often the pleasure to follow disappears leaving a sense of frustration and futility. I arrived at the end of the course just because I'm doing the specialization otherwise I would have left in the middle of the first week. I'm very disappointed. | what are the quizzes, what should | Quizz | have to test if no content | Negative | -0.76 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Good teachers but a lot of questions in the quizzes were very ambiguous and unrelated to the Course Content. | a lot of questions in the | Quizz | were very ambiguous and unrelated to | Positive | 0.74 | 0.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The course has a lot of interesting material, but I believe that a few points may be improved: 1) Exercises with Matlab are not programming ones (except for the PD controller). In my opinion, more detailed exercises (with a guide for solving them) would help to understand better the concepts behind the theory. For example, programming a rimless wheel or a SLIP template. 2) The course has a strong emphasis in theory. Some of the lectures were boring an difficult to follow. As I said before, a more practical approach would be more rewarding. 3) Quizzes were sometimes based on intuition, or topics outside of the course, rather than topics learned from the lessons. On the other side, the TAs were highly involved in the course. In addition, an extensive list of additional resources (books, papers) is a plus. I believe that the following sessions will be better than the first one! | approach would be more rewarding. 3) | Quizz | were sometimes based on intuition, or | Positive | 0.68 | -0.5 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | Nice high level overview of the motion of robots. I would have liked to do more programming (modeling of robots, controllers, etc.) in the course and have the lectures tie in closer with the content of the quizzes. The TAs were very active in the forums and helped clarify/fix any problems that came up. | closer with the content of the | Quizz | The TAs were very active in | Positive | 0.68 | 0.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| v8BCQVu-EeWzUQ41NnCQkQ | The quiz do not relate to the lectures....a lot of thinks need to be explore in documents outside of the course and the knowledge of the student has to be higher. Not a course for not engineering background. | The | Quizz | do not relate to the lectures. | Negative | -0.85 | -1.0 | 0.88 | 1.13 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | It was really a nice experience learning the fundamentals of Project Management. An eyeopener to the all the experienced workforce. The Course is really well designed including the content, pedagogy, Quizzes, Evaluation criteria and the assignments. At the end of the week, it will make sure you are well equipped the fundamental tools and try implementing them in the practical scenarios. | well designed including the content, pedagogy, | Quizz | Evaluation criteria and the assignments. At | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.04 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | I didn't pay for the certificate, and I just watched the videos and took the quizzes without certification. I wanted to get exposure to project management. The class was well taught, gave a lot of information in short video segments. Great outside examples to illustrate the concepts covered. Great value and awesome for the Darden to provide this class (especially since it was free!). | watched the videos and took the | Quizz | without certification. I wanted to get | Negative | -0.91 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.04 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | I love the way the class was organized from initiation to project execution and closing. I think the class would be better if the reason behind the correct quiz answers was given, for me this help me understand how to reason and be in the proper mindset when choosing and answer. Overall, great class and tea | if the reason behind the correct | Quizz | answers was given, for me this | Negative | -0.65 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.04 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | It is a very good and intensive course of project management. Some pieces of information have been provided little bit balled, which made me make mistakes in quizzes. However I enjoyed all the stuff. Thanks a lot! | which made me make mistakes in | Quizz | However I enjoyed all the stuff. | Positive | 0.82 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.04 |
| VcGV0kxGEeWKRQoYMLwAUw | Pros: Basics were explained well. A good kick start for beginners who are travelling towards learning Project planning and management. Cons: Wish we had assignments to practice MS Project to a certain extent. Some of the Quiz questions were confusing (Esp. the 3rd week quiz) | were confusing (Esp. the 3rd week | Quizz | | Negative | -0.72 | 0.0 | 0.84 | 1.04 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | Insightful and In-depth introductory of the events leading to the catastrophic events of holocausts coupled with engaging quiz. Additional reading supplements were great as well. Recommended | events of holocausts coupled with engaging | Quizz | Additional reading supplements were great as | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 0.93 | 1.12 |
| VfuJSYYDEeW99gozy_2pgw | This course was very educational. I thought the illustrations were helpful. My only negative comment was that the quiz questions were a little confusing at times and difficult to know what answer to choose. At times, multiple answers seemed correct based on the material presented in the lessons. I do plan to take Part 2. | only negative comment was that the | Quizz | questions were a little confusing at | Negative | -0.81 | 0.5 | 0.93 | 1.12 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | I enrolled in this course after completing the html5 course. At the culmination of the CSS3 project, I feel ways more confident in my web development skills, although I am a far ways off being a web designer. The pace of the course is excellent, and the quizzes and projects allowed me to put in practice the theory I learned about. I also love how the professor discusses the material and organised this course. I truly recommend this course to anyone at the beginner level. | the course is excellent, and the | Quizz | and projects allowed me to put | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.27 | 1.35 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | The quality of teaching is outstanding and I liked the pace and progression to the next section. If you work on reviewing the presented material to prepare for the quizzes and make regular effort to code using CSS, you will see that beginning without any understanding of CSS3, you will finish with a much better and in depth understanding on this subject...big time! Great course, I recommend it! | presented material to prepare for the | Quizz | and make regular effort to code | Negative | -0.82 | 1.0 | 1.27 | 1.35 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something. | Very broad instruction but very picky | Quizz | Spent more time frustrated with trick | Negative | -0.96 | -1.0 | 1.27 | 1.35 |
| Vh4RJTk8EeWJaxK5AT4frw | Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something. | time frustrated with trick questions on | Quizz | than actually learning something. | Negative | -0.91 | -1.0 | 1.27 | 1.35 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | Readings were not necessary for the course and quizzes were extremely difficult, seeming to be worded in an attempt to stump students, and many questions were not from the course lessons. Videos very dry and boring. | not necessary for the course and | Quizz | were extremely difficult, seeming to be | Negative | -0.76 | -0.5 | 1.0 | 1.09 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | Very well structured course, with thoughtful and sensible quiz reviews. | structured course, with thoughtful and sensible | Quizz | reviews. | Positive | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.09 |
| vrTPjkqzEeWB9g55-yieoQ | The material is useful, but the execution is poor. There were numerous quiz questions that I think they just had coded wrong on their end. I think they need to carefully look at the questions with the most incorrect answers and ask themselves if they've made a mistake. Also, this might be the first time they've tried making a peer-reviewed project part of the course, but they did a poor job. They made it a homework assignment for week 2, but didn't make it clear that it wasn't due until the end of the course, even though Coursera sends you emails saying it's due soon. This caused a great deal of confusion. Some of the required readings also had broken links. It's odd nobody on their end checked those the week the material was taught. They do provide a lot of useful supplemental material (though often pay-walled). | execution is poor. There were numerous | Quizz | questions that I think they just | Negative | -1.0 | -0.5 | 1.0 | 1.09 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Really good information for people starting companies and figuring out how to lead manage future employees. Some of the videos were cut off at the end and a word misspelled on the quiz. Other than that great job keep up the great work! | and a word misspelled on the | Quizz | Other than that great job keep | Positive | 0.84 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.96 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The concepts were interesting and helpful. It would be professional of the instructor to cite sources and employ classic principles of curriculum design. The construction of quiz items is a particular opportunity for improvement. | of curriculum design. The construction of | Quizz | items is a particular opportunity for | Positive | 0.84 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.96 |
| wnxlH3Q8EeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | This course feels quite weak, especially for the paid course, for these reasons: Models (Leader as Mentor, Coach, etc..., CTFAR model), which are given in this course, are given as is, with no references on how they were developed, authorship, and how good the results of application are. Almost no (just one) external references for reading to better understanding course material. The amount of material (about 3 hours of video, 4 quizzes, 2 discussions and 1 assignment) doesn't feel like it's a month's course, more like a one/one-and-a-half week. No references on topics, described as "hard" during the course (for example, identifying your values), which would make this topics less "hard". No instructor interaction on the course forum (I don't know if this should be like this or not, but it still feels bad). However, the final assignment is good and practice oriented. | (about 3 hours of video, 4 | Quizz | 2 discussions and 1 assignment) doesn't | Negative | -0.98 | -0.5 | 0.9 | 0.96 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | in the material. In addition, the | Quizz | are poorly written. Some questions are | Negative | -1.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | allowed only one attempt at a | Quizz | every 8 hours, where many other | Negative | -0.97 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | This course is well worth a student's time and effort. There are excellent presentations by the professor, but in it's current format the course is too short for the amount of technical knowledge implicit in the material. In addition, the quizzes are poorly written. Some questions are asked at the end of modules when the subject of the question is not even introduced until the following module. Further, for some questions the right answer is either not given in the choices presented or the grading protocol doesn't recognize the correct answer. Some questions ask what answer is "most correct" which implies that there is a strong element of subjective judgement involved in its formulation. The student is allowed only one attempt at a quiz every 8 hours, where many other Coursera courses allow 3 attempts every 8 hours, which is more conducive learning and retaining the material due to the instant feedback. Finally, there are several "NOT" or 'opposite answer' questions which are valid but confusing, so the student must be careful when answering. Recommendations: 1. Add at least three more sessions to the class and spread the technical material out over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the quiz question set to clarify what you are asking, and make certain the material was covered in the module you are assessing. 3. Don't use 'what is the best answer' ("most correct") type questions, they are ALL too subjective to be fair. 4. Recheck the grading protocol to make certain it is properly evaluating the answers. | over more sessions. 2. Rewrite the | Quizz | question set to clarify what you | Negative | -0.63 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Everything excellent, especially using IT for explaining with graphics. However, I think it needs a bit development on quizzes. | it needs a bit development on | Quizz | | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Very nicely and comprehensive taught. Material is supported with lots of graphs and multimedia that makes it more exciting. Short quiz questions are incorporated into the videos to keep the students alert, and the articles provided as a mandatory reading keep the link with the real world. I think the corse makers did a fantastic job! | that makes it more exciting. Short | Quizz | questions are incorporated into the videos | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Please decrease the time between the retake of the quizz! I can't wait for 7 days in order to retake a quizz! | time between the retake of the | Quizz | I can't wait for 7 days | Positive | 0.99 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| XeB2pvgkEeS36CIACw8Krw | Great course for people with limited notions on economic policymaking. Great to-the-point videos and quizzes that give an excellent picture which perfectly fits today's policymaking frame. After taking this course I think I can fully understand what the newspapers talk about regarding economic policymaking | economic policymaking. Great to-the-point videos and | Quizz | that give an excellent picture which | Positive | 0.98 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.15 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I found this a very good course, the reason I rate it so low is because the quizzes had a minimum of questions and these were very basic ones. The actual course content was interesting and informative and covered in depth . | it so low is because the | Quizz | had a minimum of questions and | Negative | -0.96 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | It's not a challenging course, but it is very informal at the same time. The interviews with the journalist throughout the course were my favorite parts because David was very detailed when it came to explaining how important food is a whole, compared to focusing just on nutrition individually. It's an introductory course, so I expected it to be an easy pass. Just take simple notes along the way, and you will pass the quizzes with no problem. Thanks Coursera and Stanford! | way, and you will pass the | Quizz | with no problem. Thanks Coursera and | Negative | -0.64 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Fairly well designed course and quizzes | Fairly well designed course and | Quizz | | Positive | 0.63 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Very good course overall. It gave me some good thought nuggets to keep in mind for the future. At times the course felt more like it was trying to sell the notion of home cooking rather than being about "food and health". Sometimes terms were hastily presented and maybe assumed to be common knowledge, which left me confused in one of the quizzes ("serum triglycerides", for instance). The course touches on interesting topics that could've been elaborated more on, for instance how transfats are made. | me confused in one of the | Quizz | (" serum triglycerides" , for instance). | Positive | 0.67 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | Interesting and well presented information. I wished the course had been more interactive and had spent more time on the chemistry of nutrition. Also the lectures and quizzes could have been longer. | of nutrition. Also the lectures and | Quizz | could have been longer. | Negative | -0.89 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | The materials are wonderfully presented and the instructors are very likable and engaging. However, the quizzes are very pandering and the course overall is not very challenging. | very likable and engaging. However, the | Quizz | are very pandering and the course | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xMqZG1wyEeWd6BJKWlaBIw | I learned a lot, and it was easy to follow and keep up with. The quizzes could have been a little more difficult, but overall, it was a great course. | follow and keep up with. The | Quizz | could have been a little more | Negative | -0.93 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.04 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Thank you for the course. It's really interesting! I enjoy it so much, especially the quizzes :) | enjoy it so much, especially the | Quizz | :) | Positive | 0.96 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.92 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent general course about the history of Rock in the Western World. Lots of names of musicians, companies, and music make the course seem to revolve around memorization. Even so, the professor does describe the historical element in logical chains of events and biographies. The quizzes could have been offered every week. There's no need to clump the quiz material. | chains of events and biographies. The | Quizz | could have been offered every week. | Negative | -0.77 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.92 |
| xOBaY1ibEeS-oiIAC0UN8Q | Excellent general course about the history of Rock in the Western World. Lots of names of musicians, companies, and music make the course seem to revolve around memorization. Even so, the professor does describe the historical element in logical chains of events and biographies. The quizzes could have been offered every week. There's no need to clump the quiz material. | There's no need to clump the | Quizz | material. | Negative | -0.81 | 0.5 | 0.78 | 0.92 |
| XRy7uCAeEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Proof reading needed, for the slides and for the quizzes. Overall, this is a low content course delivered in a rather boring and uninformative way. | for the slides and for the | Quizz | Overall, this is a low content | Positive | 0.84 | -0.5 | 0.86 | 0.94 |
| XRy7uCAeEeWKeQ6ae81EbQ | Horrible quiz questions. I found the distractors to be too similar to the answer, what is the point in having 4 possible correct answers? | Horrible | Quizz | questions. I found the distractors to | Negative | -0.87 | -0.5 | 0.86 | 0.94 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | In my opinion, the final exam was weak since it was compacting the quizzes throughout the course. The content could be 50% theory and 50% practice which i consider that it was more theoretical. | weak since it was compacting the | Quizz | throughout the course. The content could | Negative | -0.66 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | You can really feel the passion and experience the facilitators have on this OPV subject, even via the videos. This course is a must for people interested to delve into OPV, especially as a starting point for research. The course covers into detail almost from cradle to grave about OPV, and what I like most is that they highlighted a lot of previous and current experiments and research regarding OPV. Some of the quizzes can be a bit challenging as a few of them require 100% to pass. But all in all, 5 stars for me. Congratulations on a course well done. | research regarding OPV. Some of the | Quizz | can be a bit challenging as | Positive | 0.95 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | I would give this course a five based on the content it provides, but it lacks in three key areas. First, no forums, really? This is how we learn when we have NO instructor or TA support. They also lack workable calculations. Second, there was a GLARING error in a quiz that no one caught, showing a near complete lack of understanding of energy conversion. Third, the quiz engine has had a number of errors in the calculations. specifically in formula formatting. These are advanced systems that clearly need more testing. But all in all, this is GREAT content if you want to learn about organic (polymer OPV) solar cells. | was a GLARING error in a | Quizz | that no one caught, showing a | Negative | -0.87 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | I would give this course a five based on the content it provides, but it lacks in three key areas. First, no forums, really? This is how we learn when we have NO instructor or TA support. They also lack workable calculations. Second, there was a GLARING error in a quiz that no one caught, showing a near complete lack of understanding of energy conversion. Third, the quiz engine has had a number of errors in the calculations. specifically in formula formatting. These are advanced systems that clearly need more testing. But all in all, this is GREAT content if you want to learn about organic (polymer OPV) solar cells. | understanding of energy conversion. Third, the | Quizz | engine has had a number of | Positive | 0.88 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.0 |
| Y1sD7WReEeSPwSIACy-XPg | Very good course overall. There was a problem with the formulas in several quizzes, though. One couldn't get the app to reflect a formula properly, which resulted in the questions being qualified as wrong. Otherwise nice, interesting course Congrats, and thanks for sharing your knowledge folks! | problem with the formulas in several | Quizz | though. One couldn't get the app | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.0 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | The lectures for this class are incredibly weak. Later lectures by the same professor are reasonable and decently structured. These lectures need to be redone. The quizzes are either out-of-order or expect you to do a lot of research on your own beyond the class notes and topics. The class project is unbelievably simple, and the final metric for the class project includes duplication and one portion of the grade assigned simply if you feel the person you're grading "tried". | lectures need to be redone. The | Quizz | are either out-of-order or expect you | Negative | -0.74 | -1.0 | 0.46 | 1.22 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I really wanted to learn this stuff. I have almost no background in statistics. But the lectures didn't cover stuff with enough rigor and repetition for me to pick up much. So I pretty much gamed the quizzes and project enough to get through the class. Rather disappointing. | So I pretty much gamed the | Quizz | and project enough to get through | Negative | -0.89 | -1.0 | 0.46 | 1.22 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Homework, lectures, and the quiz are completely out of sync. Bayes rule is introduced and appears in the homework but no where else. Things appear on the quiz that aren't in the home work or lecture. This was put together from scraps of another lecture, but in an incoherent fashion. When Caffo tells the viewer that they'll need to use other resources, he wasn't kidding. I dropped this the first time when I kept introducing things that completely had not been introduced, took another stats class, then came back and aced it. I don't mind accelerated learning or using other resources, but there's guide for which concepts are needed and where coverage for them can be found. This leaves little recourse but to know stats already, or go learn it before taking this course. Otherwise you don't know enough to even go find the pieces you need. Incidentally, the dude who does the lectures for Khan Academy does a fantastic job and the lectures are a joy to watch, though some people might prefer something that moves less slowly and carefully and perhaps they would prefer something that glosses over the fundamental concepts more. If that's the case, I can't say enough good things about Biostatistical Analysis by Zar but thoroughly, logically categorizing statistical methods with short, clear examples, references to the original research, and building up one concept after another in logical order. The chapters are short, but the first 16 or so should give you a good enough foundation to deal with about any intro stats class. As it is, Caffo's presentation needs some serious testing and remodeling, but there's no indication that it'll match what Khan Academy did regardless of how much work goes in. At best, it's a bitter pill you can swallow if you already know the concepts. | Homework, lectures, and the | Quizz | are completely out of sync. Bayes | Negative | -0.65 | -1.0 | 0.46 | 1.22 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Homework, lectures, and the quiz are completely out of sync. Bayes rule is introduced and appears in the homework but no where else. Things appear on the quiz that aren't in the home work or lecture. This was put together from scraps of another lecture, but in an incoherent fashion. When Caffo tells the viewer that they'll need to use other resources, he wasn't kidding. I dropped this the first time when I kept introducing things that completely had not been introduced, took another stats class, then came back and aced it. I don't mind accelerated learning or using other resources, but there's guide for which concepts are needed and where coverage for them can be found. This leaves little recourse but to know stats already, or go learn it before taking this course. Otherwise you don't know enough to even go find the pieces you need. Incidentally, the dude who does the lectures for Khan Academy does a fantastic job and the lectures are a joy to watch, though some people might prefer something that moves less slowly and carefully and perhaps they would prefer something that glosses over the fundamental concepts more. If that's the case, I can't say enough good things about Biostatistical Analysis by Zar but thoroughly, logically categorizing statistical methods with short, clear examples, references to the original research, and building up one concept after another in logical order. The chapters are short, but the first 16 or so should give you a good enough foundation to deal with about any intro stats class. As it is, Caffo's presentation needs some serious testing and remodeling, but there's no indication that it'll match what Khan Academy did regardless of how much work goes in. At best, it's a bitter pill you can swallow if you already know the concepts. | where else. Things appear on the | Quizz | that aren't in the home work | Negative | -0.82 | -1.0 | 0.46 | 1.22 |
| YfjiOHROEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Very disappointed with how the transition from the old Coursera platform to the new platform has been handled: lots of instances of the "see lecture X" in the quizzes where the reference is now just wrong because the lectures got renumbered, an almost complete lack of community TA/mentors, and no explanations from anyone as to how the new platform works. Perhaps the worst of all has been the almost complete lack of acknowledgement of any problems from the folks at JHU. This feels like it's just been dumped on the students without any real testing or any appropriate resources to sort out any problems. | " see lecture X" in the | Quizz | where the reference is now just | Positive | 0.67 | -1.0 | 0.46 | 1.22 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | The University of Alberta has done an excellent job with this whole series of paleontology courses. The interactives are well designed, and the lectures and quizzes are interesting and memorable. I'm a fan and am looking forward to learning more! | well designed, and the lectures and | Quizz | are interesting and memorable. I'm a | Positive | 0.93 | 1.0 | 0.84 | 1.05 |
| yj814XQ_EeWIfhKr_WcYsQ | I'd like to be able to take a free version of the quizzes. | take a free version of the | Quizz | | Negative | -0.68 | 0.5 | 0.84 | 1.05 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I enjoyed Professor Seamon's lectures and I also enjoyed his book. While you do not need to purchase the book, it is well written and really helpful and interesting. Professor Seamon has an endearing and personal style which makes the material come to life. The movie selection was excellent and helped reinforce many of the technical definitions about memory. I feel the quizzes could have been a little more challenging. Overall a very enjoyable experience. | definitions about memory. I feel the | Quizz | could have been a little more | Negative | -0.9 | 0.5 | 0.69 | 0.92 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | Course was fascinating! Clearly presented. I loved the structure with a summary at the end of each lecture. The quizzes contained only information that was included in the lectures. Easy familiarity of the instructor made me feel like we were having a friendly discussion. Instructor intended to present information to the general public rather than psychology majors & he accomplished that goal. This is my favorite MOOC so far & I never expected to find one I liked more than the | the end of each lecture. The | Quizz | contained only information that was included | Positive | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.69 | 0.92 |
| z2uvwHGtEeWLqw7zlLhRzQ | I really enjoyed this class - it gave me some insight to how the mind works. The lectures were easy to understand, no full of jargon, and the quizzes helped clarify what I needed to focus on | no full of jargon, and the | Quizz | helped clarify what I needed to | Negative | -0.62 | 0.5 | 0.69 | 0.92 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Lectures are intuitive and easy to follow, while the quizzes complement them perfectly. I really enjoyed this course! | and easy to follow, while the | Quizz | complement them perfectly. I really enjoyed | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.15 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | A great lectures, I really like the attitude of this professor. He is really into his subject and I appreciated his resolution, when it comes to reducing the legacy of his favorite sociologists, into just one crucial point. Not five stars for quizzes, the parts concerning reading of classics could be much more motivating, in the aspect of the actual reading and anderstanding. Wish the course from University of Amsterdam on modern authors to come sooner. | crucial point. Not five stars for | Quizz | the parts concerning reading of classics | Negative | -0.71 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.15 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Excellent overview on the major sociological thinkers from Adam Smith to Norbert Elias. A very good introduction to the subject. Beware though - the professor is an engaging teacher, but his quizzes are tough. You actually have to do some of the recommended readings to answer the questions - there are at least three questions in each quiz based on the writings of the sociologist who is the subject of the test. | is an engaging teacher, but his | Quizz | are tough. You actually have to | Positive | 0.92 | 1.0 | 0.67 | 1.15 |
| zn0YnhqsEeW9dA4X94-nLQ | Great lectures with clear explanations and illustrations. Well chosen readings. Extremely interesting topics. Some of the quiz questions were ambiguous, particularly ones that asked students to pick the quotes that best represent a particular idea. | Extremely interesting topics. Some of the | Quizz | questions were ambiguous, particularly ones that | Positive | 0.87 | 0.5 | 0.67 | 1.15 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I have started this course again and again. Although the lectures themselves are clear enough, the quizzes are sometime so confusing and don't reflect the way that topic was taught. The worst part is R lab. I understand nothing of it. It makes no sense. I should not be part of a basic statistics course. I have wasted my money on a specialization that I can't get because I will not, and simply cannot learn R. They should have made that clear this would involve programming. I am only now thinking of learning from the videos but have given up the hope of getting a specialization certificate. The instructor in the first two session was still engaging, but starting in the third lesson the instructor is so boring and his voice makes me drowsy. Plus his sentences are so long and confusing. He has a horrible way to explain something. They need to keep in mind this is BASIC statistics, so cut down on the jargon. He does introduce the terms in 3.01 but just after one video the words don't magically sit in my memory. I've given 3 stars because although I have to work double hard just to make sense of what the instructor says by reading a book on basic statistics, at least the videos provide a structure, good examples and after watching them a few times things become clear. | lectures themselves are clear enough, the | Quizz | are sometime so confusing and don't | Negative | -0.95 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I loved the course. The clear explanations, tough quizzes and cheerful attitude helped me invest and find joy in statistics. Now I want to learn more and more. | the course. The clear explanations, tough | Quizz | and cheerful attitude helped me invest | Positive | 0.83 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | great intro class to statistics. Love the animation, teaching style and R lab exercises. The first class in coursera that video content and quiz are relevant. Highly recommended!!! | in coursera that video content and | Quizz | are relevant. Highly recommended! ! ! | Positive | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | have liked to get explanations for | Quizz | questions I couldn't answer. I wish | Negative | -0.79 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I hadn't touched math in any real way in years and this was a great re-introduction. The videos were fun and engaging, and while the material was challenging, I felt I got a lot out of it. I highly recommend it for people who need statistics for their work or for a degree program but who are feeling a little intimidated by it. As far as feedback goes, I would have liked to get explanations for quiz questions I couldn't answer. I wish there was a way to say, "This is the quiz score I'd like to accept; now please explain to me the ones I missed." The lack of feedback on the quizzes was frustrating at times. | The lack of feedback on the | Quizz | was frustrating at times. | Negative | -0.9 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | It is really helpful to get an idea for statisctics. Examples, quizzes, assignments as well as R lab designed on according to content of class. There is no suprise. | get an idea for statisctics. Examples, | Quizz | assignments as well as R lab | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Excellent course and well taught by both instructors. 4 stars because of the lack of feedback on quizzes and exam. | of the lack of feedback on | Quizz | and exam. | Negative | -0.93 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Good course, but it seems there are some errors in the quiz and labs | there are some errors in the | Quizz | and labs | Negative | -0.77 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | Despite some error in the quizzes I learned quite a lot by taking this online course. Apparently the course organisers are overwhelmed by its success, since they react (too) slowly to comments made by students in the discussion fora. At least, errors should be tackled immediately. | Despite some error in the | Quizz | I learned quite a lot by | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I never thought I would learn so much so quickly in a math course. The course moves fast, but being able to rewind the videos and repeat anything I don't understand is really helpful! I love the applicability of what I'm learning, and my ability to take notes and practice everything on the quizzes makes the information stick. | notes and practice everything on the | Quizz | makes the information stick. | Negative | -0.63 | 1.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| ZNeGqEC2EeWC4g7VhG4bTQ | I think the notes given after the lectures should contain the formula the students need. Also the quizes should show the correct answers once you completed them, if not you cant figure out why the questions are wrong. | formula the students need. Also the | Quizz | should show the correct answers once | Positive | 0.67 | 0.0 | 0.89 | 1.09 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Great course, but the quizzes are not quite there yet. They focus too much on minor details and the questions are sometimes awkwardly phrased. | Great course, but the | Quizz | are not quite there yet. They | Positive | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.86 | 1.19 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | I found Wesleyan University's course "The Ancient Greeks" rich in varied information. Professor Andrew Szegedy-Maszak's lectures are particularly thoughtful and the quizzes are clear. An altogether enjoyable, well-worth experience. | lectures are particularly thoughtful and the | Quizz | are clear. An altogether enjoyable, well-worth | Positive | 0.94 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.19 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Totally excellent and enthralling! The subject matter is well treated and easy to follow. The quality of the videos are top as well. I fell the the mix of lecture, reading and quiz at the end of the week was just right. | the mix of lecture, reading and | Quizz | at the end of the week | Positive | 0.67 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.19 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Material is excellent, but new format for coursera pages is horrible. Hard to find anything, taking pdf dumps to create saved artifacts from class is completely broken, quizzes do not allow you to see your answers after you submit them even after you have finished the class so you have to remember to save the quiz answers before submission. Worst part for me is that you can only get a certificate if you agree to verified certificates which means giving coursera access to your webcam and also allowing them to save your typing patterns with to me I don't mind paying something for the courses, but will not use verified certificates as I have no need for their verification, and will only take on demand classes that use this format if they have content i really want. | artifacts from class is completely broken, | Quizz | do not allow you to see | Negative | -0.91 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.19 |
| zTzjmvssEeSDoyIAC1CH0g | Material is excellent, but new format for coursera pages is horrible. Hard to find anything, taking pdf dumps to create saved artifacts from class is completely broken, quizzes do not allow you to see your answers after you submit them even after you have finished the class so you have to remember to save the quiz answers before submission. Worst part for me is that you can only get a certificate if you agree to verified certificates which means giving coursera access to your webcam and also allowing them to save your typing patterns with to me I don't mind paying something for the courses, but will not use verified certificates as I have no need for their verification, and will only take on demand classes that use this format if they have content i really want. | have to remember to save the | Quizz | answers before submission. Worst part for | Negative | -0.99 | 1.0 | 0.86 | 1.19 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Very succinct and interesting content. Though provoking quiz | succinct and interesting content. Though provoking | Quizz | | Positive | 0.69 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | The presentation is succinct and the course touches on all the key areas of macroeconomics. It would be great, however, if it were easier to review a completed quiz and find out why a wrong answer provided was incorrect. | were easier to review a completed | Quizz | and find out why a wrong | Negative | -0.83 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | A great course! Whether you are simply interested in applying some concepts into your life, or a student (like myself) looking to brush up/or learn economics, this is a great intro course! I especially love the module overview at the beginning of each week. I usually copy and paste "key questions" into Evernote, and answer them when I'm watching the videos. Then I would review the Q&A before and after each quiz. It turns out to work great for me! Thanks for making this course available on Coursera! | the Q&A before and after each | Quizz | It turns out to work great | Positive | 0.81 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Very well explained and not too fast. The quizzes were challenging but fair. I can totally recommend this course, because it gives you a good insight in macroeconomics and was not too theoredical. I also would like to thank Cousera for this great learing opportunity. | explained and not too fast. The | Quizz | were challenging but fair. I can | Negative | -0.83 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Presentation slides could've been better prepared. The quiz could've thrown the right answers after finishing. But it was very informative overall | slides could've been better prepared. The | Quizz | could've thrown the right answers after | Negative | -0.73 | 0.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | Well done. Logical progression of learning, good examples, clearly spoken. There were quite a few spots where sound or video cut out for several minutes while the other (either sound or video) continued to work. Not sure if it was my computer or a course issue. One quiz (i believe week 10 or 11) had a question with two right answers. You could either choose 3) all of the above or 4) answers 1&2 (which were both correct). I believe '4' was the correct answer. Very well created overall...nice job. | computer or a course issue. One | Quizz | (i believe week 10 or 11) | Negative | -0.67 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |
| _UsmIV-PEeSnpyIACzWBsQ | One of the best courses around in Coursera, with intensive contents and quizzes. At the end of these two courses (I took the Microeconomics as well), I totally grasped the fact that "economics is not something to memorize, but to conceptualize"!! | in Coursera, with intensive contents and | Quizz | At the end of these two | Positive | 0.71 | 1.0 | 0.81 | 1.13 |