Poor.csv

Id,Review,Label
49,This course doesn't contain any new information. It does not teach you but just excitedly shows commonly known facts.There are better ways to invest your time.,1
71,"I do not find very interesting this course. too many interviews. It could works for the first course, but not for the second. I was expecting to have more technical material and lessons.",1
79,A lot of speaking without any sense. Skip it at all cost,1
105,This course doesn't contain any new information. It does not teach you but just excitedly shows commonly known facts.There are better ways to invest your time.,1
173,It's not a course... this is a very short general introduction to 3D Printing,1
187,"First of all, I really enjoyed Professor Ittner's presentations. Sadly, his presentation was only 25% of the course. Professor Ittner was very direct but also was very engaging in how he delivered his content. I had a good feeling that I could really understand the material he was teaching. If I could give a rating for just Professor Ittner, I would give a 5 star rating. Now, this is why I am giving this course a 1 star rating. But I do have to say, going into the depths of Accounting Analytics is not easy. You really need to have a good grasp of Accounting otherwise you will get lost. Professor Bushee did not make the first 3 weeks really easy to get through. While I enjoyed his examples & case studies, he simply did not do a great job of really explaining and illustrating the concepts he was teaching. And worst of all, he setup a digitally generated classroom where he had his computer generated students ask pointless questions, make pointless statements, or answer with pointless statements/answers. I really wish I had the time to analyze how much of the course time he spent doing this, I would estimate that it's around 10% but it could very well be higher. There are so many different examples to pick form, but I'll just pick a few here. ""I didn't read the Iliad or Odyssey some I'm not going to ask you to"" in reference why in regression there are Greek letter used for coefficients (it's a fair assumption that someone taking this class understands coefficients), a 30 second exchange where a PC generate student says that they're ""stocked"" to run some regression followed by Proffessor Bushee informing us that ""we're going to run some narly regressions"", Professor Bushee saying he doesn't know how to perform Earning Management Analysis on Mars but he certainly knows how to do it on Earth, and a joke why people don't like accountants. These segments add absolutely zero value. They lengthen the time of the course. To make maters worse, I'm sure Proffessor Bushee had to spend even more time creating this additional interaction together.",1
192,No practical knowledge learnd and no clear examples of the topics. Too complex all the course,1
224,"Professors need to undergo a presentation and Instruction Design skills. They were talking a lot and everything was going over my head, the reason was there were not visual prompt for the examples, specifically in the last week.",1
264,The Capstone project has been getting delayed since JanDont expect yourself to complete the specialization,1
272,Very boring,1
273,"Easiest accounting common sense. If you ever took acct , this will be a wasting of time.",1
332,"I didn't like that course because of:-weak explanations of algorithms-almost all assignments I googled, I spent all my time googling these algorithms-when code is submitted and something goes wrong It is not possible to understand what is really happened",1
334,poor course. never give any algorithm. No clue where the problem come from. The forum is only help a few people. No general ideas how to solve the problem. waist a lot of time debugging but still couldn't pass the assignment.total waste my time and garbage course.,1
364,Mo comment went way too fast no contact not deep,1
386,Don't recommend.You're better off skimming through the ableton manual and using the search function to get the answers you want.,1
525,"is a very very boring curse, don't recommend anyone, please for your good at everyboduy else kill this course, don't embarrass yourself and the universities that represents",1
532,I am dropping this course. don't e-mail any more for this course. How do I unroll in this course.,1
558,"If you don't speak Chinese it's a terrible course...The lectures are recorded from lectures at university and the rhythm is very slow and not very well explained (at least the first week). The transcriptions into English are incomplete, so understand this course is very very complicated.I do not recommend it at all.",1
630,"I was terribly disappointed in this course. Mr. Onuf spends the majority of these lectures implying what Jefferson thinks without discussing much in the way of actual history. Further, the course seems more of a commercial for the University of Virginia than anything else. Overall, a waste of time.",1
644,The lectures are just videos of the professor bloviating about Jefferson. There is nothing academic about this course.,1
665,79 USD? just to be able to submit peer-graded assignments... talk about greed,1
796,"It says 'advanced writing' but it is advanced for college students, not advanced overall. I found it extremely basic.",1
865,"Extremely poor quality of instruction. The lectures themselves are little more than the material being read directly off the slides by an individual with a poor grasp on the English language. The majority of the slides are walls of unclear and non-descriptive text. Even with reading directly from the slides, the lecturer is overly circumstantial in her explanations if not just outright tangential. I commend the authors for putting together a course outside of their native language but, in this case at least, it does more harm than good.In short, this course has the air of a group of first year students giving a presentation verbatim from the slides, as another commenter also mentioned below.",1
866,"This course is a discreditation to coursera, and it's low standards are appalling. From a purely certificate based perspective, the only requirement to complete the course are completely the quizzes. They are short, and can easily be googled, or the slides can be downloaded and the answers simply CRTL+F for keyboards. There is zero need to watch the lectures ( at least for the first 2 weeks).The lectures are terrible themselves. The English is beyond horrible, and I don't understand the modern culture of having teachers teach in languages they can't speak. It is purely reading off the slides in any case, word for word. I learned more about the basics in neuroscience in a 20 minutes lecture from a separate course, ""Computational Neuroscience"" than the entire first week here.If you actually want to learn neuroscience, check out HardvardX's intro course.",1
868,"This is the worst, most pathetic course I have taken online. If Peking University believes this is their best - I'll not be taking another course with them. The instructor's command of the English language is awful and the sub-titles are some help, but not a lot. Instructors are just talking faces up front - they cannot teach. They may be great in the lab, but keep them out of the classroom. I toughed out the course, but it only got worse. I had originally signed up for parts 1 and 2 of this course. Canceled part 2. The use of slides that are not clear / too small and not on the screen long enough to digest the information did not help. Do yourself a favor - avoid this course. As a side note - I have taken in excess of 25 online courses, this was the most painful.",1
870,Very boring... The professor is just reading (with a bad English). The illustrations are also very boring...,1
874,"The professors sound like a group of first-year students presenting a group project, literally reading notes off of a powerpoint slide. The professors also can't speak English, so instead of explaining things in depth, they have to very, very slowly read basic phrases (to explain complex subject matter) off of what's basically a teleprompter.",1
880,"Really poor powerpoint presentations and videos, half in chinese. The accent of the teacher is horrible (i'm not an english-native speaking person so it's hard for me to follow english when badly spoken, so i cut off the sound and only read the subtitles.)The content is interesting though.",1
883,"I don't want to be mean, but the first week was terrible! I was expecting what it said: ADVANCED neurobiology.I feel bad giving this review. I'm just dropping the course.",1
884,"After finishing week 1, I have decided to stick with Duke university's Medical neuroscience which is starting up again. I also highly recommend ""Understanding the Brain The Neurobiology of Everyday Life"" which I believe was taught by the University of Chicago. I found them to be far more engaging the viewer and the format to be much easier to follow. I found it visually disturbing and also have to keep pausing to read the slide before it switches.It's too bad because I was really looking forward to this course. It also seemed she had trouble pronouncing many of the words and I do not want to learn how to pronounce many of them incorrectly also many of the slides did not have an English translation on them.",1
887,"This course is useless and perhaps even harmful.The professors would have done much better if they had taught the class in their native Chinese language and then got a really good translator to make subtitles in English.I tried turning off the sound and just watching the presentation while reading the subtitles, but even this was so badly done in terms of language and presentation, that although I desperately wanted to take a course in advanced neurobiology, I felt that this course could actually destroy my love for the subject or teach me things that are incorrect because of language mistakes.If you are not a native speaker of English then by all means steer even further clear as you will learn some very bad English habits and pronunciation.I'm sure the profs' English ability is fine for collaborating with other professionals who already know the material, but teaching in English was a big mistake.Again, I highly suggest they re-do the entire thing in Chinese and get really good translations and subtitles made and then I think it could be an awesome course. Now, as is, it would be truly foolish to take this course.",1
890,"Lots of good information, but the presentation is very bad. Not only are the professors clearly struggling with the English (and the material, calling anatomical planes ""plates"" and confounding sulci with fissures, etc), but some of the recording/video editing decisions make it less engaging and more difficult to follow. For example, the size of the images is often compromised because they chose to show the professor on the left side of the screen, even though it is absolutely unnecessary to do so.Overall, I do not recommend this course.",1
895,"coursea does not allow me to quit the class. Also, I cannot do the homework or watch video at my own pace.",1
905,"The transition from the original Coursera platform to the new one has significantly reduced my overall satisfaction with the course experience (I have previously taken the 4 earlier Rice courses in this series and enjoyed them immensely).Major contributing factors to my dissatisfaction:-- The user interface changes are unwelcome and have detracted from my ability to engage with the material.-- There have been arbitrary (and unannounced) changes to polices, e.g. dropping distinction grading.-- The price increase per course and locking down of assignments to only those who have paid has unfortunate side effects, including.-- In contrast to previous courses in this series which had an active community engagement the discussion forums are now relatively empty, running the courses more often is not going to help this situation.Having previously been an unpaid evangelist for the Coursera approach and materials I now find myself extremely reluctant to recommend this revised experience to colleagues.",1
918,No translations available despite what subtitles and transcripts say.,1
1012,"the tutorials is not for average students, it takes a very high skill to understand them . also the quiz nd the assignments r too tough.hope you can make them a bit easy, the last one ,ie with graphs and trees was a bouncer. If the maths required is so high, please take a week to first explain the math fresher required in course and then start the main course",1
1148,the tests are difficult.,1
1156,"Poor visual aids, course content and format.",1
1265,very bad course,1
1559,This course should retrieved from Coursera. It is plenty of mistakes. One of the quiz is repeated. Questions do not have relation with lectures.,1
1624,"This course is not about Excel or MYSQL. This is only about Probability distribution, binary classification etc. So, if you're interested in learning some Math, this is a great course for you. But certainly not for learning some basic Excel and MYSQL. I am very disappointed and have lost all my money for nothing. I did not learn what I had initially thought I will. I feel cheated, I have lost both time and money at the same time.",1
1657,"Quizzes don't match what's been taught in the video lectures. Very poorly-designed questions, where there is more than one correct answer.",1
1726,"The instructor is VERY bad at presenting. SO dry and monotonic. Omg, I really want to learn all this but can't stand him talking.",1
1728,The course is very superficial in nature and there is no difficulty...,1
1729,The quality of videos is not good. There is some absurd voice in between. Also the course for week 3 has information related to finance which is beyond understanding levels of a person with no financial background.,1
1749,"What's the point of online education if one can only access the assignments if him has purchased the course? With no access to assignments, how could one evaluating his efficient of study?",1
1769,The course could be completed in a matter of a few hours. Super basic stuff. Waste of money.,1
1817,"If you are going to try and complete the specialization for this course series I suggest you look elsewhere. I was able to complete the first course with ease, but the second course to this specialization felt incomplete and does not tie in very well with the how excel is used. Don't be fooled by how easy the first weeks assignment is for the second course of this specialization.**My initial rating for this course alone was 4 stars, but due to the lack of effort and information in the 2nd course of this specialization I have to give this 1 star as these courses are all tied together.",1
1838,"I an very disappointed that DUKE hits your up for $79 just to grade the fist quiz (which should cost them $0). This is the fist time I have seen an Institution do this. I can understand charging for a certificate, or for a Final project, but not right out of the gate. I hope that the spirit of Coursera is not changing to a ""pay to play"" site. There are other higher rated Universities that take a more noble approach. I wonder if all the reviewers paid $79 day 1 for this class, or did DUKE recently changed their pricing policy after the reviews...",1
1870,"Very difficult to apply the knowledge without some support material with the content, e.g. PPT slides.",1
1873,"I would not recommend this course for a few reasons:1. There are no course notes accompanying the video lectures. Transcripts of the lectures in unformatted text files and a glossary are available for download. I really can’t figure why the instructor doesn’t provide an outline of what key concepts he wants us to learn from each lecture. Also, I’m surprised that Coursera doesn't require a basic set of learning tools for a paid class, such as lecture notes or an outline. This might be a good class for you if learn well from videos.2. The quizzes contain ambiguously written questions for no good reason.3. Two weeks in and there is little substance. For example, week 2 includes a few Skype videos of the professor interviewing former students from a Duke Master’s program. They seemed like very intelligent and nice people but the content of the videos offered little value (i.e., nothing new) to someone already working in corporate IT.",1
1898,Coursera does not want to give me a Certificate. I've got 95% for this course,1
1946,This is no real need for this course. Everything sounds like bits and pieces from magazine articles.... I suspect the sole purpose of its inclusion in the specialization is to fund Coursera. $79 at a time....,1
2039,"Really bad course. Badly taught, strange choice of assignments and quiz questions. Unfortunately, I did the free trial and Coursera didn't process my cancellation so that I had to pay for a whole month for this.Complete waste of time AND(!!!) money!",1
2070,"My experience with Teradata has been awful. Connection issues, latency, time outs. What should have taken 45 minutes took nearly two hours because of the load times for datasets. No clock or indication of progression for the queries.",1
2086,"I think this course if poorly organized. The instructor is really trying to show us that the real life data sets and databases are messy, but providing only written instructions for me it proved useless. I, for one, need to see what other people are doing and not read long pages of horrible written explanations.I paid for the course just to be able to do the exercises, which I also think it's a minus.All in all it didn't ""ENHANCE"" my career prospects, mostly because nothing useful was taught here. Wouldn't recommend anyone to pay for it.",1
2123,Unprecedented high speaking speed.,1
2138,"This course is too much doggy! Please do not use Coursera for advertising your friends´companies, or at least learn how to do it a little more professionally to look really relevant! This psychiatric lady also seems to be sexits. Looking at differences between pictures with a girl and pictures with a boy is really abominable and shows an intentional discrimination and racism. It is really shameful.",1
2189,"The technical support of this course is just terrible: just like many many other students (see the Discussion forums), I have experienced serious difficulties to access the databases platforms we need to learn and to complete our assignments. I can only echo the innumerable complains from my co-students about the lack of efficient support and technical reliability of this course; many of us are very unhappy about this, especially as they have paid for this course ... and what is Coursera doing about it, by the way?My advice: beware before enrolling in this course and even in this entire specialization, and search for alternative options (there are many, not only on Coursera but also on EdX and others ...)!!!",1
2227,"It is very interesting, but we have to face problems with Teradata, I have not been able even to log in, and a lot of students are in the same situation, and the problem persists, even in the duedate of the test.",1
2255,Perfect guided course. The only handicap to me is the accent of the speaking English. I hardly understand what they are saying without subtitles.Thx for your all precious effort.,1
2314,Unable to even start it... Click on videos of week 1 and nothing happens,1
2325,very boring and didn't learn anything i didn't already know. this was more like watching an anti drug propaganda film that I couldn't finish it.,1
2339,"yeah i would give zero if possible. very shallow and general, cannot learn much from it. if u want a course about neuroscience there's way better course than this. what the hell emory? what hte hell coursera? i feel less and less sincerity in coursera's mooc these days. edx is doing a much better job in my perspective.",1
2347,"If possible, I would give this course zero stars. It provides an incredibly closed minded view towards all topics and provides very minimal factual information. The makers of this course, and especially the instructor, obviously have had very little to no experience of any kind with most of the topics they discuss.",1
2377,"Feels underwritten by the DEA, and aimed at perhaps high school students? Very slow pace; info could've been distilled into less than half the lectures (I completed the '7 weeks' in 3 days). Doesn't really distinguish between users without serious problems & addicts (which I believe amplifies gateway effects & experimentation once people meet users who aren't brain damaged or addicts). Creates an exaggerated and arbitrary distinction between prescribed drugs as all good and recreational as all bad, and dismisses any possible benefits of substances that are not legal, noting only that medical marijuana has been helpful for HIV patients, which is certainly an understatement. Components are also helpful for cancer patients, anxiety, and more. Perhaps break this into studies of common drugs, how they work, & effects and separately, the mechanisms of addiction and treatment. However, I appreciated the 'reduce harm' policy economics.",1
2400,"Really disappointing course. Content is shallow, despite the impressive credentials of the Professor. Quizzes are ridiculously easy.",1
2442,Interesting to say the leastWhy cant i access my certificate. I paid and successfully passed,1
2491,Unprecedented high speaking speed.,1
2494,"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.",1
2528,Could've learnt this on youtube - really not very good. Dr. Egger's courses are rigorous and full of math. This is just a bunch of pretty pictures. Shouldn't be included in this specialization.,1
2595,Tableau is garbage and their assignment practice questions don't work,1
2618,The course content is itself interesting but the lack of active mentors to provide guidance makes the course really difficult to learn. So many unanswered questions on the discussion board and many confused students. I am so glad I am not paying for this course.,1
2624,There is a gap between the instruction level and the difficulty of quizzes and final projects.,1
2667,"Online grader for labs is terribly buggy. Attempted submitting labs several occasions - all fail. Local builds work fine with apps working as expected and tests pass. The online builder gives very little feedback other than ""BuidError"". £40 wasted. Will not recommend and will never fall for it again. AVOID!",1
2677,"Outdated and unsupported !The code for the exercises was made for Eclipse ADT and Google dropped support for Eclipse a while ago. The official IDE for Android development is Android Studio now.I could import the project for Lab1 but I'm unable to compile the tests and the program with Android Studio, I get a ton of errors. My post in the forums about this is unanswered for 3 days now.",1
2723,"Very fast pace with no support. Be prepared to make countless online searches or to discuss solely with peers. Many drop out by the end of the course. Final Project is far too difficult for this course, because it did not prepare me at all. If you want to learn Android programming, I suggest you look elsewhere.",1
2733,"I was disappointed in the lack of explanation for the tools. Since everything depends on the IDE, and there was no instruction about the IDE, I found it difficult to do the labs. In the course of trying to, the IDE somehow managed to corrupt my hard drive. After that I pretty much lost interest in the course.",1
2765,No passion is on his lecture. There is only dryness and ethical superior pride through his theory.. Altruism without love is an empty vanity and well-designed commercial intention for selling his theory.,1
2773,"Too many lectures, specialized audience with huge competition, not accessible by novices of philosophy and only assessed through a single peer-reviewed assignment-essay.",1
2780,poor design on presentation assignment,1
2845,Very poor in all aspects.,1
2853,"Shame on you University of Houston SystemI did the first three lessons, which are less than average, then went on to quiz 1, after completion, a window appeared to ask me for money to get my results! This information should have been provided when I enrolled! I find that very mis leading.",1
2857,"The lectures are rather simple and easy to follow, but it's impossible to pass the quizzes with only a basic knowledge of mathematics/physics, only for experts. With the information provided in the video lectures you won't recieve a grade, there's a lot of extra work necessary with no other help given then some wiki that only a math genius would understand without any further help.",1
2914,"Horrible, endless rambling, no solutions to the quiz questions (unlike cal 1 course). sucks all the fun out of math, avoid this course, find an alternative where you can learn more with less time spent watching him write out 20 numbers.",1
3098,I did not know what was going on and I have to stop.,1
3105,Bad video quality and errors in course material. Worst course on Coursera.,1
3109,"I can't even begin to describe how much pain this course gave me.The code snippets and instructions in the exercise videos are incomplete/have errors and it's impossible to complete the exercises just using those (it's hours of extra work to get things working). Also, at some point you are given a new version of part of the files in the project, which won't match the rest of the files so there's remedial work to be done for that too. Some of these issues were flagged on the forum 5 months ago and still the course material wasn't updated. It all gets even worse as all assignments build upon the code written in these exercises.The assignment instructions are unclear. You are shown a demo of how the solution should look in the assignment videos, and then you are told you actually have to build something different than what you were shown. I also couldn't understand some of the grading criteria. You will get/lose marks on uploading a screenshot or naming variables/functions a certain way.I was really interested in this specialization so I kept going hoping it will get better but it only got worse. After 11 weeks of work I am ready to start something different. Wasn't expecting such low quality content on Coursera.",1
3182,Too hard to listen his English,1
3259,Very bad explanation too boring lectures,1
3278,"not good as usual one, the code you provided can not work, I had to debug againand the instructions for the assignments are not concrete as the last two courses",1
3281,no basics being taught! straight away code snippets are pasted.,1
3300,Not happy with this course.,1
3403,"Too long videos, you should make more short videos, instead of one boring long video. You speak too slow and that makes a 8 minutes video turns into 30 minutes video.",1
3509,The course is very boring and monotonous. It should be made more engaging. One needs to capture the concentration of students for a subject like Angular.,1
3548,TOO MUCH Peer rating too little hard information,1
3694,All this peer grading nonsense is garbage. If we are gonna pay 63$ a month of something we can at least get the proper grading system included.,1
3745,Startinng it now,1
3780,Linking programming language to hardware sucks. Do not waste time on this course.,1
3815,If I am auditing this class why can't the quizzes be free also?What happened to free Coursera?,1
3859,The course is almost about nothing. It seems to me that the teacher didn't make enough preparations and make a lot of mistakes during the couse. After 8 weeks of Arduino-related courses I've got almost nothing new besides first 2 chapters of Arduino Starter Kit book.,1
3914,"No forum, what are you thinking!",1
3949,This course is too short and have little real time example .,1
3956,One week of this course was only marginally relevant to the subject. The instructor even said as much.,1
4015,I don't need the teacher to read Aristotle for me. Reading is not Teaching.,1
4045,"I took all 5 previous courses in this series and they were all great.But suddenly Coursera has changed its policy, and one can not take courses for free anymore.If you just want to learn and gain knowledge without chasing the certificate, than the course is useless, because you can't receive feedback for your work.",1
4152,"I thought this course would teach art appreciation,but seems geared towards Teachers.",1
4155,The teachers there do not do what they teach: they rattle down their text as fast as they can speak and do not emphasize the content with movement or even change of expression. I was disappointed.,1
4177,The first three weeks assigments were way too easy and the answers could be found in the material.The last assignment was very poorly described and the material was very limited in explaining OOP. That meant it took a lot of time figuring out what exactly was needed to complete the assignment and how to do it.Disappointing after a great first course. Hoping the next will be better.,1
4211,"Waste of time and I did not learn anything from this course.It is basically 6 weeks of the ""facilitator"" asking questions without offering much in the form of answers.",1
4214,"Such lame quizes, I cannot pass them although I know this material in my sleep,because the english is so bad and has so many ambiguities; There are no single answers to a question, instead you need the check the correct answers, which are phrased in s misleading way, and one little mistake fails the whole question. So I try and try and try and never get all the correct checks for the specific questions. So I just fail and retry and fail and retry. This is so frustrating I consider I will unroll this course. Same because I know all this material !!!!",1
4234,"I´m quite disappointed in this course. First you should know that the first week doesn´t reflect at all the rest of the course in difficulty and in matter. As I was delighted by the first week presentation and way of explaining as soon I started the second week I was wondering what happen to the clear, concise examples and ideas presented in the first one. First The presentation of the following weeks is done by handwriting on software that give a very very poor graphic view. It´s BARELY READABLE ! It allows really smalls amounts of infos to be displayed. That could be redeemed by good explanations you may say but sadly it´s not the case most of the time. The examples are rarely connected to something real, numbers come up from ... nowhere. The level of difficulty could be challenging if you don´t have a bachelor of sciences like Math or Physics or Bio. It´s NOT A BEGINNER COURSE.To give more context I have done and succeed more 16 courses , 2 specializations, followed/audited about 3 others courses and that is the first time I´m giving a bad review. I´m sure the teachers put a lot of effort in doing the course , there is a lot subjects presented but I definitely suggest a change in the presentation to start then connect and fully explain examples. With some changes that course will fly high :)",1
4239,"Not very helpful for those with a solid statistical background. I prefer to use R to do the modeling things, while this course should talk more about pivot tables and existing useful financial functions which advantage over other statistical tools.",1
4243,Not enough detail and information provided in the lectures to undertake the final assessment.,1
4245,"Irrationally difficult and inexplicably sloppy. Having taken first ""Business Metrics for Data Driven Companies"" I had high hopes that it would be on the same level.Well, I was wrong. It was extremely messy, jumping around from definition to definition with little to no explanation and there was a general lack of motivation from professor Egger's part.Apart from week 1 that had some necessary basic knowledge of Excel, all of the next weeks' lessons were fast paced beyond a beginner's comprehension. By week 5 I had lost the motivation to go on and was only able to finish it through a great deal of trial and error on the quizzesI would not recommend it, unless you have some basic knowledge of the economic theories used in this lesson.",1
4249,"An absolutely dreadful course. The only things you'll end up studying are how to use the spreadsheets given and what the instructor was thinking when creating them... I can't figure out what, and there doesn't seem to be any way of finding out. The lectures were mostly stuff I learned at school and really quite easy, but I just have no idea what the final project has got to do with the lectures.",1
4257,if you do not have a background in statistics do not expect to pass this course,1
4283,This is more of an introduction to statistics lesson than one in excel... not what I had signed up for,1
4284,"Not done with the course yet, but I have to say it started out very well and organized. I was actually learning how to use excel in the first week WHILE the instructor was teaching. The later weeks, however, seem to be completely different. They're disorganized and I'm struggling to see how the material correlates. It's as if I'm being bombarded with random topics, in addition to the fact that the instructor literally stops using excel to teach. After week 1, lessons are just random notes on a blackboard with a link at the end to the excel sheet in which the instructor has already prepared before with A LOT of info that you need familiarize yourself with solo. I had high hopes when I was done with the first week, but now I have to say I'm bored and demotivated!! (so far)",1
4286,"This course has nothing to do with Excel. It should be called ""Statistic and binary modelling with little use in excel"". If you except to learn about functions, pivot tabels, macros and the many other exciting features of excel, this is NOT the course for you.",1
4287,I dislike this course because I have to complete so many assignment in one week. Instructions could have improved and slides could have improved rather than using chalkboard. Sorry there are a number of times I have to rewatch the videos and still dont understand. Hence I even have to place myself in another slot because I could not finish the assignment. Please improve on this module so that it is more enjoyable for learners who really want to learn. Thank you.,1
4314,Title misleading. Never ever a beginners course.,1
4315,"The concepts here are useful and Mr. Egger is a knowledgeable instructor but 1) this class is really about gathering information with Excel as the tool - you aren't learning anything about Excel functionality, so the title of this course is really misleading if you just want to become a stronger user in Excel 2) there is a huge disconnect between the video lessons and the excel worksheets used to complete the assignments and since many previous reviewers mentioned this, it seems like that's not going to change. 3) the disconnect between the lessons and the assignments wouldn't be an issue if the instructor could be bothered to respond to forum questions. Mine sat unanswered for 5 days as the deadline passed. You are NOT going to get support if you dont understand something.",1
4316,Really unhappy with how difficult and over complicated it is. I came here to learn about Excel. Pivot tables? functions? The course really loses focus and its unfortunate that I am now stuck here and cannot continue the entire specialization.,1
4322,"Very poor lecture, I barely learn anything about excel from this course. The course title is quite mis-leading",1
4326,"When the instructor for the course expresses amazement at the level of difficulty people are expressing in the forums that tells you a lot about how out of touch he is with what he is teaching and what is really required prerequisite knowledge.There is minimal actual instruction in excel-most often concepts are taught much like Khan Academy, on a digital blackboard. Nothing inherently wrong with that but when your course title has the word 'EXCEL' in it one would reasonably expect the instructor to actually demonstrate using excel. Nope, not here.If you've never heard of linear regression or Bayes Theorem don't bother with this course. Honestly. While those things may be easy to explain without the math they are very difficult concepts to implement and a simple 10 minute video won't clear the fog.You absolutely will not 'master' data analysis with this course. I've used Excel for over 15 years, daily, and to have the gall to say your course will 'master' something with a few videos is misleading and deceptive.If it wasn't for the TA/Mentors who do the lions share of work in the forums answering questions and deciphering the questions so students can understand them this course would be an abysmal failure.If you're wanting to jump on the data analysis/ scientist bandwagon look elsewhere. i.e. EdX has a great course on a true introduction to data analysis that is more in line with people's impression of actually using excel in that context.Now, having bashed the course I do believe the instructor to be a very competent and knowledgeable individual, but I feel he's been in academia too long and has grown accustomed to teaching those who've been in school continuously and still have algebra/ stats fresh in their minds vs. those who need to brush away the cobwebs. The course in more on the level of a 201 and in certain parts 401 level but not 101.",1
4329,Misleading course name/title. Was expecting a course on using Excel. Forums were cluttered and not monitored often.,1
4335,It is very easy and unusefull course.,1
4339,"Really wanted to take this class. Unfortunately, I believe it is more about advanced statistics then excel. It was advertised as a beginners class and that is not the case. I recommend having a significant knowledge of statistics before taking this course. I'm a 15 year senior level accounting executive and I was easily spending 10 to 15 hours a week plus watching the videos 3 or 4 times each in order to understand the content. It was very difficult to understand. Disappointing.",1
4346,"Poorly coordinated lectures. References to resources that are not provided. No response (at least, for days on end) when questions are posted on the forums",1
4348,"This is an advanced Statistics class. Learning was chaotic, confusing, and fast paced. Strong Mathematics skills required. As icing on the cake, there is an 8 hour project at the end of the course .. and they only tell you at the end that you should have been working on this all along! Not at all what I wanted to learn or find productive in the real world.",1
4350,"No relevance to specialisation. Do not expect to get through this if you have not taken multiple statistics courses at university level or higher maths. Barely any practical application, does not prepare you for final project.",1
4354,"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.",1
4355,"Interesting statistical concepts, and great theory. However, the lectures and the quizzes do not prepare the student well for the final project.",1
4357,Really confusing and struggled a lot. The course doesn't prepare you for the final project.,1
4359,The course doesn't prepare you for the final project.,1
4361,"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.",1
4369,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,1
4384,"Content is not well organized, videos are disconnected from one another, explanations are not clear, spreadsheets contain vast information that is not explained anywhere. It is been quite difficult to follow through the course and I bet many students are giving up.",1
4398,"this course is definitely NOT for beginners. you MUST have intermediate to advanced knowledge of statistics and math. I had to resort to google and khan academy extensively just to grasp the concepts in this course. This course also does not teach you everything about excel, let alone master it. you just refer to pre made excel sheets for quizzes. thats it. Good luck figuring those out.",1
4407,"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.",1
4423,"Complex concepts (e.g., regression), which cannot be taught in such a short course format (I know from extensive prior training), are taught here in an arcane way. I don't know how students without prior knowledge on these topics (e.g., regression, ROC curve analysis) could possibly understand this when taught this way.Course is also in an 'early draft' mode, with plenty of mistakes in the videos/slides. The course (and specialization) really tarnishes - instead of enhancing - this institution's outside image and reputation.Really a deception; sorry I took this class and specialization, a complete waste of my time and money. The initial presentation was misleading (and I have found online many people sharing the same feeling).",1
4426,"Given this is the third (or fourth) iteration of this course, it's telling that the errors from the original release remain in the videos and quizzes. There are other, higher-quality Data Science MOOCs available.",1
4429,"Too advanced, not enough Excel",1
4433,"Probably the worst class I have ever taken on Coursera. The teacher asked us to do tons of things without explaining how and used tons of complicated math formulas without explaining what they were, what they did, or when and how to use them. There were also actual incorrect answers in the videos on occasion, so that even if you did do things correctly, you would think you were wrong and be confused, and there were a lot of inconsistencies between the spreadsheets used in the videos and the methods used to solve things compared to the actual spreadsheets given to us, which makes things pretty impossible to learn. If you're more advanced, it may be easier to find and understand the differences between the video and the spreadsheets, but the whole point of this class is that it is for beginners.",1
4445,Not for beginners as promised. You need strong statistical skills to understand it.,1
4459,The course requires good knowledge of statistics as a pre-requisite.,1
4463,"Unfortunately, the material and lectures of this course fell short of my expectations. Lectures don't follow a logical path and are all over the place, and some concepts are not expanded as required. Overall, I believe they need to improve how the content is presented, and how it's applied in a real world context.",1
4466,"Being honest, the lessons in the course are disconnected with the weekly tests, specially for the final exam. Professor Daniel Egger and his assistan MUST improve the lessons, including examples step by step specially for the multiple linear regression su",1
4470,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'.,1
4473,"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.",1
4495,I would not recommend this course. It was very poorly planned and seemed thrown together.,1
4508,"the course neither explains statistics properly, nor teaches how to use excel effectively, disappointed",1
4512,"If I could give it less than 1 star, I would. It wasn't an Excel class, rather it was a targeted business statistics class with only disjointed lectures and no benefit of textbook to actually help you learn. Lots of errors in the lectures and tests, and little to no support from course staff. Stay away! You won't regret it.",1
4519,"im in week 4 , cant master data analysis in Excel",1
4534,"Very confusing lectures, he says you don´t have to have a basic level of excel to do the course but I didn´t find that true. Struggled through all of the lecture videos and the quizzes seemed to come out of left field.",1
4535,"Very poor material and instruction videos, with no logical flow or process.",1
4540,absolutely one of the worst courses... I am deleting it from my list.no slides make it harder to follow.,1
4545,"Warning: The lecture videos along will NOT be enough to prepare you for the final assignment! Be prepared to do your own research for the extra study materials. On the forum, many students said they had to drop out during the last week (probably without getting a refund!) because they were completely caught off guard by the huge knowledge gap between lectures and the final assignment. If you are determined to get the specialization certificate, you should definitely start the final assignment as early as possible. Don't wait until the last week or two!!",1
4567,"Don't know how to apply the statistics and excel formula in real world situation. Besides, it becomes focus on approving statistics equation than teaching data analysis in excel",1
4572,Where is the course study material and are you providing a book on this subject and Excel? You have me lost.,1
4714,Instructor was boring,1
4841,"Personal difficulty in understanding accents, my own lack of ability.",1
4849,I found it very hard to understand the lecturers and what they were saying.,1
4878,"The teachers doesn't seem to enjoy beeing there.......... The all seem like ''The faster we do this, the sooner it will be finished....''",1
4903,"The articles that were limited were actually somewhat helpful. The google hangouts seemed lackluster and draining. I would recommend more substance in the videos, or MoMA might switch to an article/book MOOC that doesn't rely as much as people talking about their opinion without a ton of evidence or support. Wouldn't recommend participating in this MOOC",1
5072,"Way too much videos and too little hands-on learning. Felt like the course mostly taught you to remember stuff, and not actually learning a skill, though I broke the course early.",1
5137,this course was a waste of my time; luckily I found out after wasting only 6 hours on the preview. this course apparently requires a level of probability knowledge I don't,1
5152,Uses R with no explanation. Why does it use a challenging programming language that is not the point. The point is to learn statistics.Use Statcrunch - so students can focus on statistics not programming,1
5193,"The course is as much about computer programming as it is about statistics. The statistics I can do with pen and paper; the programming, I found very, very unhelpful and confusing. Eventually, I gave up on the course.",1
5263,"Puerile, made up examples with made up data, no deeper treatment of the mathematics involved than the here-is-a-magic-formula-use-it approach and mistakes (including serious conceptual and factual errors) evident in the quizzes and the R labs. Far better to look out for the ""Data Analysis and Statistical Inference"" course by Duke on Coursera that is presented by a passionate statistics teacher, covers the same material (and more) and provides a far better introduction to R than this course.One of the stated purposes of this specialization is to clean up the way social scientists conduct science and are perceived as scientists; in this respect, it appears that the worst enemies of social scientists are social scientists.",1
5270,"I love the main lecture of the statistics. The Subject is fun. After couple lecture, my mind was very clear.But most of the time I'm working on the statistics software name R. I think it would be better if require R knowledge. If not, student like me will need more than weeks to get use to R. I don't mean learn another software is bad idea. I will always like to learn something new. That's why I go MOOC. What I mean is R and Basic Statistics should be separated. First R, than Basic Statistic. Or first Basic Statistic than R.I really enjoy the class. but the extra is a bit heavy for me.",1
5289,"Good lectures, but the R-lab is horrible. Do not take this class.",1
5374,"This course is bad!I had come upto week 4. While Chris Impey is knowledgeable and good, the course structure is very poor and leaves a lot to be desired. I would venture to make some suggestions:a. Restrict each video to a max of 7 minutes. More than that makes one sleepy.b. Reduce the number of videos in each module to a max of say 6.c. Instead of having Chris expound it like an audio reading, please include some slides, pictures,tables so that the matter to be learnt becomes self evident and Chris doesn't have to speak so much. A good example is the Coursera ""The Global Financial Crisis"", which I am also doing currently.d. If you feel all the material in this course has to be studied, then to achieve the objectives in (a) and (b) above, divide this course into two parts, Astronomy: Exploring Time and Space - part I & II.e. The written assignments are very simple and do not require any mental resources other than memory. Can you make the questions more challenging? For example, in Telescopes (Assignment 2), can you not ask a question like ""In addition to Atacama, Chile, using Google earth, which other parts of the globe may be suitable for installation of ground based telescopes?"" or ""To obviate the blurring effect of the atmosphere, discuss the possibility of high altitude balloon based telescopes?"" or ""What do you feel about the fact that since today's mobile phones have high computing ability, their components can be used to make a low-cost space based interferometric telescopes?""Kudos to Chris and his team! On the whole, knowledge wise, this is a good course.",1
5393,I can't have my certirficate and already I pay for it!,1
5396,Boring,1
5449,"The first three courses in this Duke series were superbly well done. I have taken numerous courses from Harvard and Johns Hopkins, and none of them compare in quality of execution of the first three Duke courses in this series.And then there was Bayesian Statistics: much of the ""instruction"" in this course was truly awful. The quality of the slides and video and so on was still excellent, but the ""teaching"" was horrible. Vast amounts of totally unexplained jargon and very extensive equations were thrown at the students with the apparent assumption that the course was a review for postdoctoral statistics students. When material is beyond the scope of what perspective students can reasonably be expected to understand, faculty members should be honest enough to just say so rather than pretending to teach the subject matter.I appreciate very much what the Duke faculty achieved in the first three courses, but the treatment of Bayesian statistics that I have just suffered through was shameful.",1
5451,"This is easily the worst course in the Statistics with R specialization. Contrary to the earlier courses, which were very competently taught by Dr Cetinkaya-Rundel, teaching quality is very poor in this course. Both of the main instructors are unable to explain what's going on. There is vagueness and ambiguity, which is almost impossible for the uninitiated to resolve. All in all, a very frustrating experience. The course would urgently need re-recording. As it stands, it shows a huge disrespect for the student's time and effort.",1
5455,"This class assumes a lot of statistical knowledge and background that is not covered in the first three classes of the series. So much statistical terminology and jargon was used by the instructor, it felt like taking a class in another language where I had to constantly stop the video and google for the terminology she used. It took a lot of grit to finish the class, which was overall a very demoralizing and negative experience.",1
5468,"The first three classes in this certification were excellent; this course was anything but that. There seems to be a significant disconnect between the first three courses (probability, inference, linear regression) and the fourth course (bayesian). I do not have a strong statistics background but I felt the first three classes in the certification challenged me, while providing an adequate level of support and thorough / articulate examples; the pace was perfect. Yet, with the fourth course I believe that either: 1) there needs to be a bridge course that prepares you for the bayesian course, or 2) the material needs to be taught at a slower pace with more specific and well presented examples / frameworks to work from. Although I was able to complete the course, I will now have to find an alternative source to learn from in order to really understand bayesian stats.",1
5474,I get really frustrated when the tutor doesn't explain lots of concept/symbols in the materials.....,1
5477,"This course needs much more work from instructors before it gets offered to the public. It is poorly assembled, offers hardly comprehensible material with no or very few resources to turn to. Reading material is listed, but they are useful for people already skilled in Bayesian Statistics. Exercises are worded such, that even the questions are a challenge to understand. Quizzes contain material never mentioned during lessons. Discussion forums are left unanswered by the teaching staff - or if they reply, they do it in a very negligent manner. No support on the merits. A major disappointment.",1
5479,"About two years ago I completed Dr. Mine's course ""Data Analysis and Statistical Inference"" and was quite impressed by it. I always hoped that there'd be a follow up on bayesian statistics, so I was really excited when I heard that a course on this topic had finally been created. However while attending the course I became more and more disappointed. Dr. Mine does a nice job explaining things, other teachers in this course aren't as talented. Most slides / videos are quite useless for teaching because they skip over important steps without giving appropriate explanations. Also I was quite disappointed that this course pretty much only focuses on conjugate priors. MCMC is only skimmed over and the introduction to MCMC is more than questionable - instead of showing a simple example, MCMC is squeezed into the topic of bayesian model selection. Another point is R - this course doesn't really teach bayesian stats with R. It teaches how to call one-liners like bayes_inference (from package statsr) or bas.lm (from package BAS) instead of lm. This is totally disappointing. I wish this course would skim over conjugate prior methods and then focus on MCMC sampling methods by teaching how to build interesting and practically useful models using JAGS/STAN/PyMC/whatever. For anyone interested in bayesian stats I'd recommend reading ""Doing Bayesian Data Analysis - Using R, JAGS, and STAN"" and ""Probabilistic Programming and Bayesian Methods for Hackers"". These books are actually cheaper than this course.",1
5485,"This course is not well-presented. Lectures are unimaginative, and there isn't enough supporting material or readings.",1
5487,The course lacks of explanation and it's very difficult to follow. It seems that the instructor just reads the slides without reasoning and explanation. Suggested reading materials are needed.,1
5489,"I don't understand how come this course can get such high reviews. My experience with this course is horrible. First of all, most quiz are poorly designed, lots of mistakes. For instance, there are 10 Qs in week 1, 3 of them have mistakes. Wasted me tons of times.Lectures are also difficult to follow. Instructors usually just give formulas without further explanation. I forced myself to go through them until week 4, I finally give it up. I feel like it is a waste of my time. I need to find a better course on this topic.Most coursera courses are very well designed. This one is the worst I have ever experienced.",1
5497,Not much useful. Limited in interactivity. Dropped out after a week and half,1
5512,too many theory and too boring,1
5526,I found this course is very much theoritical. I should have included mathatical models and ways to relate them with our day to day life.Thanks,1
5533,She is fluent just like reading the scripts.,1
5551,"Very bad course. The content can barely be applied outside US, you don't know from which perspective it's explained (for sales or purchasing people), the videos are bad quality, the teacher is babbling, no extra resources, no interaction with the audience outside the assessments.",1
5552,This course offered nothing significant or new to anyone who has spent any time around business or government negotiations. It really seems as though the instructor either assumes all of her students are completely inept or that because it is a free course that producing a reasonably viable product is not necessary.,1
5557,"Too short, too easy, too costly. Beautiful picture, beautiful title, but low content.",1
5561,"The Instructor doesn't give enough info about principles and her presentation skills are very week,the studying material also are very poor",1
5566,"Boring, didn't have strength to finish",1
5570,"teacher talks much too slowly, and uses many complex terms when they are not needed",1
5581,"Course depends too much on multiple third-party sites to be as enlightening as I had hoped. I learned about some great resources, but that's about it.",1
5627,Painful to watch and boring as hell!,1
5673,"I didn't learn anything more than what I already knew- which was basic concepts- and was able to pass anyway. I'm very disappointed. I want to be a good programmer, and this did not teach me any programming.The videos are not conducive to learning. You need a more engaging teaching plan. Don't just read slides to me, I can do that myself. Use videos to explain concepts, but stuff your videos with practice problems. Put more code in the videos and walk me through it. Put in mini-quizzes in the middle of videos, to keep the student aware of how they are doing in short increments. Don't move on to the next thing unless they have learned the first thing.I was unable to complete the projects because the practical coding was not taught - don't throw a third of the course into the first practice I get to without first walking me through short, contained examples of how to actually use the code, and testing me on each piece before putting it all together.",1
5675,"The entirety of this course is ""watch and listen"". There are no hands-on activities/assignments that get you implementing what you are (supposedly) learning. The assignments that are offered are optional and consist of filling in the blank code without actually providing you a way to see how your code works in the big picture.For example - they go on and on about how intents are complicated and tricky, but they don't actually give you a required assignment. It's optional. Then the actual assignment is ""Do this here, and this here, and then this here"" and only when you have completed every step can you actually run the code. But this doesn't actually show you how to build the intent. All you did was write down what they told you to and where. You never actually build anything yourself. You don't actually get an idea of how these things work or how to implement them yourself from scratch.The quizzes are also pointless. Every quiz is multiple choice, select all that apply. There's no thought required, just regurgitation of info from the lectures.Also, the entire week 1 lectures are HORRIBLE. The lectures on git are sssoooo dull that I could not stay awake no matter how much I wanted to. They are given in a monotone, bored tone that will drive you insane.Overall, this course seems more like it was hastily slapped together, without much thought, and then never looked at again. I would not recommend anyone take this course, let alone pay for it.",1
5679,"More practical application would be helpful in solidifying knowledge. Concepts seem abstract outside of any programming practice. Additionally, flow of lectures seems scattered at times: concepts are introduced then not expounded upon. This creates a distracted learning path that makes it difficult to follow the lessons. (From a beginner programmer's view).",1
5689,"Course work was entirely optional and only started at the end of week 2. The required level of involvement was too low to be helpful. I don't learn well just watching lectures - I can get that much from YouTube!!! However, I expect a bit more when paying $500 for a specialisation.The first module in the series was too basic but at least there was a lot of coding involved. This (second) module didn't even have that.",1
5690,"I was really disappointed with this course, especially considering how great the first course was. IMO...there was too large of a jump between the two courses, and the plethora of ""I'm totally lost..."" threads in the forums would seem to back up my opinion. I'm currently reading Head First Android Development and it is exactly what I needed to grasp basic concepts as well get my bearings in the Android world. If this class remains the same I wouldn't be surprised to see attendance drop in further courses and/or Coursera starts receiving complaints about the difficulty.",1
5703,This course gives good perspective on innovation process and how to bring idea to life. However it was disappointing to me that content of the course has nothing to do with Art and Culture.,1
5718,"I would like to give this course worse than a 1 star. The course explanations are very poor. The explanations drag on and make no sense. I had to go to outside sources to make sense of what the videos were discussing, which I felt like defeats the purpose. Why am I paying for something when I have to use other sources to better explain. I would never recommend this course to anyone. Listening to these teachers explain each subject poorly was killing me. I like to learn through examples but what they provide just makes it more confusing and hard to follow. Each instructor got worse and worse! The videos were so hard to watch and the accents made it even more worse! I feel robbed from taking this course. I should have asked for my refund within the first week, but I felt since I was paying, I would stick it out a little longer. You will get a better explanation if you take each subject and youtube the videos on each subject. Very useless course. Hated every week of this course and I wouldn't dare to continue with the full specialization program. It's very sad to hear that this course gets recommended a lot, but it missed it's mark completely.",1
5730,"I don't recommend this course. The lectures barely touch on the topics being taught, you are expected to go learn on your own. I learned more from the free Khan academy than from this course. It would have been worth more buying good literature on algorithms.",1
5809,"Def a useful skills to have when starting to interview for jobs. This is a hard course to teach to begin with. I found the lectures really boring, too long, hard to understand and just not really motivated well. I think the homework problem are good, but they are very time consuming. You need to use various methods to find edges cases and though that might be a good skill to have as well, it's just too much to get done in one week and somewhat frustrating when you're only stuck in one test case. I think this could be an excellent course with a few modification on the slides and adding more motivations and making shorter homework problems that focuses on the main part of the material for that as oppose to things we've already covered in the previous week. At the moment, I don't think I'll continue this specialization the way it's designed.",1
5839,"If one has taken the Algorithms 1 and 2 course by Profs. Sedgewick and Wayne, this course will be a disappointment and waste of time.",1
6002,"So much of the content was limited without paying for the course, that calling it a MOOC is a real stretch. Because of these limitations, most of my work was done on my own, and by purchasing the related book. Since my local Community College used to run this course, but now points to this onine course instead, it's a huge disappointment. Most folks who are going into business for themselves need good information but have little cash. The one star is for the handouts (I believe pulled from other websites but pointed to by this course) - these have been useful.",1
6078,"Why is this course dangerous?I took this course because first I liked the idea to have a history lesson spanning the age of the whole universe. Maybe it is also intriguing to explain everything just with one principle: the second law of thermodynamics. BUT as it turned out they don't have any clue what this second law of thermodynamics means. They always forget the second part of it: it is just valide in a closed system. I think everbody will agree, that the earth for example isn't a closed system.In the beginning they tell you you should be critical about everything new you hear or get taught. But if you are critical and question things they teach you they will ignore you. One glance at the discussion forum shows: they are fast in answering good feedback and compliments by students, but critical questions (with scientific papers who show different facts) get ignored for weeks and months. They are cherry picking. They just see what encourages their view and their opinion and ignore everything that contradicts their course, opinion, believe and dogma. In this respect they are so dangerous. That is the same principle how cults work.Maybe their goal, stopping polluting and changing the world in such a speed seems to be a good one. But also here you have to be careful. When they talk about climate change and the overuse of ressources they are exaggerating by a factor of 50! In my opinion you are damaging an important discussion if you are lying and exaggerating in such a shameless way. For sure it is not helpful! But again, the truth doesn't fit in their world view.Furthermore they ""teach"" that cities get blown away by taifoons is caused by the ""universe balancing entropy"". This isn't just lack of understanding physics, or history, or flow mechanics, it is just insane.In summary: this is not a history course, but the ""teachings"" of a lying, exaggerating, cherry picking cult with no knowledge in particle physics, cosmology, chemistry, biology or even history.So please: if you take this course, be aware of this pitfalls and their intentions.",1
6114,"I find the week 6 of this course completely irrelevant. Also, I'm attending courses on Coursera to learn and quizzes are IMO an essential part of that process, but definitely not essays. For me personally, essays are just waste of time and there's nothing beneficial about them.Another thing that bugs me is how questionably and often misleadingly are thermodynamical laws interpreted by the professors in this course.",1
6208,the class gave me nothing. nobody wan's to waste tons of hours to learn nothing. so I personally think this course is on of the worst classes among the Coursera.,1
6209,Course is not good at all. The instructor assumes that you have a good genomic background.,1
6210,I struggled so hard! No way near the same level as the other courses.Came from Computer science background and felt that I missed so many terms and concepts that were required for this course,1
6212,"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.",1
6218,complier error all the time!!!!!!,1
6308,*No Stars*Another boring animal class that I would not recommend. The teachers do seem nice and well educated however it is still too boring and slow for me.,1
6337,"Too many animal mistreatment clips were shown, also some gross misstatements of biological-scientific truths and widely held facts. Humans cannot change the genome of any living creature, DOGS are WOLVES and always will be. We have domesticated and bred for certain personality traits and characteristics. Done with your course.",1
6524,This course was nothing like true Tibetan Buddhism which is my religion ! please consider canceling it immediatly or having me or a real lama as the teacher,1
6526,This is a course that sounds like a bad audiobook. The prof. reading a the lecture and giving lot of information without any soul or teaching energy to engage. I prefer then read a book about this topic than being here at this course get bored listening at the same tone a reading of a lecture.,1
6527,Audio is terrible - can't continue,1
6528,Not well presented at all. Great disappointment.,1
6532,"Really horrible in instruction, experience and application ability of lecturers, poorly put together and assembled. It was astonishing to experience such self-promoting hacks rather than knowledgeable practitioners of the art of meditation. It is very important to clarify the content of a somewhat titled misnomer. The course was an academic study in mediation bring is rather esoteric, questionable, and personal opinion concepts and comments; in effect a mesh-mash.",1
6536,I am very disappointed about the content. It is not a course. Pr David Germano is just reading text. No design no learning experience. I would learn much better with just reading a book. It is a shame I was very interested in the subject.,1
6539,"The course is very useless, there is no meat, only water - there is no substance - only talking around the topic. I am appalled that such research exists, and ashamed for the coursera",1
6543,The course appears unfinished and very disorganized. The lectures are monotonous and boring.,1
6547,Not for the basic student looking for information. Very detailed,1
6551,"Too much theoretical. Probably this is not the course I was looking for when I joined it. Nevertheless, I will try to get some concepts from it, particularly for what concerns the practice of meditation and mindfulness.",1
6558,"Watch one or 2 lectures before you join the course, if you felt okay then go ahead, otherwise don't waste your time and money, something wrong in the course structure...",1
6561,"I think the teacher had to little expression , it was like he was reading loud, and I felt I might have red the text myself. I lacked some enthusiasm",1
6575,Terrible...can't believe how a quality the course is. Embarrassing.,1
6577,too hard to follow,1
6592,extremely boring teachers,1
6631,not very good audio.,1
6632,Very poorly structured. Purely academic and dull as dishwater. Buddhist meditation is a profoundly beautiful tradition but there is no beating heart here. I gave up quickly.,1
6634,I waited a long time for this class to start but now that it is here I find it impossible summon enough will to pay attention to the lectures. As a retired teacher I have more of an ability to stick to a class than many but life is too short to wait for this class to perk up. The professors seem very knowledgable but their teaching methodology leaves a lot to be desired.,1
6636,As a beginner to the subject... I feel like I know even less if that was possible after just the first few weeks!! I plan to start again sometime in the future and see if I can figure things out in this course.. after I learn about Buddhism somewhere else first!,1
6642,Far too academic. Nothing of substance but lists. I'm not here for monotonous lectures.,1
6646,"I was looking forward to starting this course, but so far, checking through the delivery of the first 4 weeks, I can't see spending time voluntarily following this. There is no doubt a lot of work put into this, but it is painful to take part, so no thanks for me.",1
6650,The introduction is great. After that it's unbearably boring.,1
6651,Badly taught,1
6655,"Joined this course as I was really interested in understanding meditation itself from a scientific perspective. The monotonous drone of the instructors combined with the super low volume that one has to strain to hear, the extra extra long essays which read like one long chapter less novel, the videos which extend what could've been covered in 5-7 minutes to nearly 30, all take the interest away. Unclear if this was intentional & intended to enable participating students to be more patient and tolerant of imperfections around them.",1
6656,boring,1
6868,I submitted homework for week 1. I get an email telling me I did not submit. Then week two the course makes references to material not covered in week 1. it looks like a week is missing between week 1 and week 2?,1
6870,Boring course!,1
6940,Not what I expected,1
7062,A waste of time.,1
7137,"My course 3/4 in this specialization is still incomplete because the questions had wrong answers in the module quizzes and it was literally taking HOURS to complete the quizzes because you had to guess which one of the wrong answers would be correct this time. The questions rotate through slightly different questions each attempt so you can't simply use elimination on each attempt, YOU GUESS EVERY SINGLE TIME. IT'S LITERALLY 100% LUCK! I thought maybe course 4/4 would be better but nope, same problems here. I've wasted over 6 hours in total trying to pass these broken tests and I'm completely over it. I also reached out to chat support, they went through and said they couldn't find anything wrong and couldn't help me and a refund was impossible because it's past the refund date. Even though I paid for 2 broken, un-proofread, time wasting courses. Also, in course 4/4, the math tables in the videos are staggered all over the place and looks terrible. Seriously an issue of someone not even looking at the video before publishing, would have taken less than 5 mins to fix for the entire course. Also, every time a ""checkpoint"" question is supposed to pop up, nothing happens. In every single video, they're all missing. I've used Coursera for a few other courses and thought they were reliable but this makes me think otherwise and I feel like such an idiot for paying $200 for this COMPLETE GARBAGE. Other people in the forums have shown they have the same problem posted over a month ago but nothing. Please, someone from Coursera get a hold of me and help me resolve this ridiculous problem.",1
7153,"Nothing much to learn, the videos were rather short. There's no lecture on computing the angles and the full features of the framework. The framework wasn't updated for Swift 3.",1
7154,waste of time and money,1
7155,"Why there is no ""minus one"" star? Because one star is way to much for this course. Stay away!",1
7156,"In this capstone project, you're given a framework to work with, and asked to create an app with pretty minimal required criteria. The problem is, there's very little instructions or support, so it feels like a classroom where the instructor said ""do whatever you want"" and walks out of the door. Overall the specialization feels ill-organized and of questionable quality, and there are plenty of negative sentiments in the forums.",1
7157,"After the first week, the instructors never showed up to answer a single question in the forums. The capstone project itself was disappointing, I learned much more from doing my own app in class #3.I took the Coursera Android specialization, which was eons better than this. I would not recommend this iOS specialization to anyone. I would never again take a MOOC from U of Toronto.",1
7159,"This capstone project was a huge disappointment to me. The course caption stated that this would be where we would use Location, Design and Usability, and Persistence and Settings to build a high quality app. Also stated is that ""you’ll apply your skills to create a fully-functioning photo editing app for iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch."" Earlier I have also read that we would be allowed to build an app of our choice or according to teacher's specification. That text now seems to have been removed.Anyway, none of these promises were kept. Instead we got something like 20 minutes of lectures in total for the whole four weeks, all on a simple framework to track face features. Unfortunately this framework isn't very competent, so there's only so much you can do with it. Most of us have only placed some static images and simple animations on top of the face shown in the camera view, and that is actually enough to get full marks according to the form used in the peer review. How does that even begin to fulfil the promises of the caption?We have paid as much for this course as for the previous three. There should of course be a similar amount of lectures on more advanced topics like current best practises for UI design, the Location API which was promised, and other interesting things that provide the building blocks for a state of the art iOS app. For a real cornerstone project, I expect that more than 4 weeks would be necessary in order to be able to build a good app, since many of us are doing this on our spare time.I feel sad that I had the misfortune of signing up for this course before it was made, but hope that you will take our collective criticism and make a good course out of this for future students.",1
7162,This is a joke.,1
7163,"If I could, I would rate it 0/5 stars.Do not, I repeat, DO NOT pay and enroll this course. And you will be disappointed if you do. There, now you have been warned.This part of the specialization has been put together in a haste, without effort and absolutely without any care of teaching. I'm completely shocked and disappointed.In other words:It is a complete joke and a sad excuse for a MOOC. Shame on you University of Toronto!Yes, harsh words, and here's why:The course description does not reflect the contents nor the final assignment. Face tracking? That's pretty far from what I expected from this when I paid $284 for the specialization.In total, there is only 25minutes of video lectures. Really? That's it? It's way too little for a capstone project course.Staff does not care about learners's concerns. Zero effort to respond in the discussion forums. It takes days before there is any response at all.The assignment descriptions and requirements are sparse and vague. Why are we doing face tracking when the description talks about location apis and ""putting it all together""?",1
7164,"The course has been released way too early, clearly it lacks most of its content and what does exist isn't working properly either.",1
7181,Course material is very poor and did not give much support for doing assignments.,1
7224,"As a manager in an IT consultancy, I can't justify sending my personnel through this course, even at $69 per course. The amount of information gained is very thin and does not move one toward being productive.",1
7231,"Poorly designed assignment on data modeling did little to expand my knowledge on the topic. Which is a shame since the individual lectures were well done and very interesting. The ""Pink Flamingo"" peer-peer-reveiwed exercise needs to go.",1
7233,The last peer review is really hard to do. Hard is because the wording is very ambiguous and not all understand how to review. There was a guy who answered with SQL query. This is hardcore since we have not learned that yet...,1
7235,Not worth your time or money.,1
7239,"Very basic, the 'hands on' exercises are not very hands on and do not actually add much value",1
7245,"hard to follow not because it is difficult, but the lecture is only slides, texts, reading slides, very boring and not so many hand-on instruction. only thing i remember is the instructor's face after finish this class. Dont know why you add this into such a good specialist.",1
7258,"Compared to the other Coursera course I attended ,this one is by far the least useful one. The instructor is super brief and his slides are mostly made of a list of acronyms!I would not recommend it until they make some serious changes to the content and presentation of material.",1
7280,"lecture too focus on the theory that not very useful on business world. The BI tool ""microStrategy"" used in the homework is too slow and crash from time to time.",1
7283,The material and the lecture is not so engaging.,1
7333,"Some lectures are just right for the public in general but most of them seem to be built from common sense, there´s where I wonder if the American people are so unliterate on food issues. The quality of the visual material is also variable, I am sure that including animation of more appealing graphics would be helpful to engage more people into the course; another challenge would be to prepare more challenging content.",1
7407,Not very useful.,1
7548,"The course is very basic, videos contain a lot of repetitions and quiz questions are too easy (in addition, I believe that there are too much negative questions). I believe that this course should be called an Introduction to the basics of Nutrition and it's only for complete newbies. There are no insights in specifics of child nutrition besides general concepts of balanced diet and some tips how to make your kids be more enthusiastic in eating vegetables.",1
7700,Too basic and too focused on 'farmers market' thinking.,1
7786,"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.",1
7850,Not very good nor scientific,1
7888,I only took this Course because I was forced too and I don't think it matters what you eat it's just how much you eat. You also don't need to eat lots of Vegetables and Fruit to be a Health person just saying .Plus this course is boring as hell,1
8032,"Worst course ever. I stopped partway through. Too many links to outside stuff. Tests/quizes were not based on what was presented in the lessons. Test design is horrible, too many negative questions. Glances over the good true information about nutrition to tell us about free range farms, farmers markets, etc., which most people do not have access to or can not afford.Giving it 1 star is being nicePeople who sponsored it should get their money back.",1
8170,"""much better than the data science with R concentration provided also by John Hopkins. This course has concrete examples, and the lecturer doesn't treat his audience like the first-grade kids."" I take this back. The lecturer doesn't know what he's taking about and what he is gonna talk about for at least half of the time.",1
8176,"This course was a complete joke. Many practice quiz questions and even test questions had wrong answers marked as right so you had to re-write test over and over until you guessed which one of the wrong answers was right. Also, there was a theme of lazily worded questions and answers throughout the entire course. There is always a way to write in non ambiguous ways, it just takes some effort. Very frustrating to decipher the lazily worded questions. Someone should have proof read this course. I feel like an idiot for paying for it.",1
8198,"It is hard to be constructive when you do have something brilliant to compare with.The very first thing to say is that the course is presented through poorly drawn cartoons for 5-year-olds and ineffective lecture videos with little or no eye contact with the instructors. The presentations are filled with strange icons and drawings appearing every here and there, making not much of a professional impression.After watching videos, in just about 5 minutes after the lecture is over, the retained information was always going to zero. Sometimes I had to rewind the video to retrieve the points they were trying to make. Or maybe I just didn't want to listen to them. But it seems impossible due to the fact I am interested, and I do finish every course on Business writing I run into. Always with 100% final grade.The overall demeanor is not as professional as it has to be. I recommend the designers to watch ""Write Professional Emails"" with Gerry Landers by Georgia Tech and ""Teach English Now!"" with Dr. Shane Dixon by Arizona State University. I do not normally remember the instructors' names, except for brilliant ones. I do not remember the ones of this course.I do hope my criticism will eventually lead to a better experience for your students. I apologize if I was overly direct and wordy.Regards,Rafael",1
8211,Good for someone who has no idea of anything about calculus,1
8260,"The course content is okay and covers the basics well enough. However, the assignments are structured for memorization not learning and contribute little to the experience. I decided to cancel my subscription as there are better options on EdX and other Coursera courses.",1
8282,"Presenter is very bad lecturer. She seems to be reading (badly) from a tele prompt, rather than lecturing. The quality of the slides is very poor. Not the level of a reputable University.",1
8351,I cannot complete the course due to installations problem of the software required even if I have all the requirements needed on my laptop.,1
8420,Last exercise is half the course and took many frustrating hours to install and for me never worked. No support provided by instructors. You are on your own.,1
8427,"Too many things I already know and which are quite obvious, when you have some little computer science knowledge, less practical information; the explanations for installing Cloudera etc are insufficient!!!",1
8443,"Language is not good, and Lack of Info",1
8445,"Honestly, for the price paid, the value given is quite low. I expected to have more hands-on working with the Hadoop ecosystem rather than this course's focus on background that really does not help one to become productive.",1
8451,"The course provided almost no value , and there was almost nothing covered that you couldn't find online for free. The presentation was probably the worst part of the course: It was extremely boring and made it hard to get through the videos.I didn't expect much practical parts in the course, but there was even less than what I expected: What was described as setting up a hadoop cluster consisted of downloading a preconfigured VM image and running it, and then typing in a couple of commands that were provided to you. Again, nothing of value was added, and quickly going over the FAQ page of any of the products mentioned would be more helpful, faster and a lot more interesting.",1
8458,Less useful than reading an introductory chapter. Being able to reiterate acronyms or idiosyncratic mnemonics does not demonstrate any real understanding of this field. The minimal information provided and low level of the instruction at least clarified that this specialization is not worth pursuing.,1
8459,"Very disappointing. Poorly written quizes and presentations. The level of the course is far too basic to be of value, but is required for the specialization. Why not offer an option to test out of basic introduction courses?",1
8488,"Very basic. All this information of this course can be self taught by Googling and the hands on exercise at the end of the course is a joke. For the $59 price of the course, expected more.",1
8502,"Extremely basic intro, not valuable if you have any understanding of the the space",1
8567,It´s a requirement to put down a payment to take the quiz,1
8647,"Hello all. I'm glad I took this course successfully. However, I have some notes. As a 4th year medical student, I see that the information is superficial. I finished the course in around 3 weeks, so medical students wouldn't get so much benefit out of the course. I wanted to learn more details, specially in depth about each type of the 5 cancers from the basics to clinical. Secondly, there was no interaction between the students and the doctor supervising the course in the discussion blogs. Thirdly, I believe that the assessment was too easy. I suggest a 60% passing grade with a more challenging assessment. Finally, this is my personal opinion. I enjoyed the course and I would like to see more improvement in the future.",1
8779,the instructor keeps repeating the same information throughout all the lectures. It is not as impactful as I thought it would be. The last straw was her saying that-that was an article.,1
8783,Very boring,1
8786,very low quality and not practical,1
8799,I couldn't access all of the reading materials and could never finish this course.,1
8829,This course is not designed well.,1
8842,Poor content. Clearly filler material for the specialization. :),1
8866,Some questions in the quiz for module 2 are unclear and seem unrelated to the course work.,1
9077,The instructor does a very poor job of explaining the material.,1
9109,"It is impossible to input solutions to quizzes/exams - even when they are correct, they are graded as wrong - a massive waste of time",1
9197,"you must use the exact format to get the correct answer on problems, or it will be marked wrongthe course is ""as is"" meaning when there are mistakes in the coursework neither web hosting nor faculty have are available to correct mistakesmoderators are not allowed to correct course content, so what they end up doing is editing your post in the forum. get use to this: ""A moderator deleted your post in Calculus One because of spam""""Review our forum Code of Conduct to learn more about guidelines for participating in course discussions"", but i and others are only posting problem areas, thus rendering the forum discussions uselesssince the moderators only have the power to delete and edit your post, there is a list of content errors for the course that you will need to look at. real smart. i asked to have my grade adjusted, but they deleted that post also",1
9246,"I think this course is great, I like everything about it, but I can't say the same about the quiz format, it is rigid and non-standardI gave up on the course many times because of thisHow do write Sqrt(5) for instance ? 5x must be 5*x or it is not acceptable.I am sorry, this is pretty bad",1
9323,C,1
9342,Not enough material to understand the concepts.,1
9375,"Really frustrating method of teaching. Class is incredibly slow and does way, way too much simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication to prove extremely basic points for a calculus course.",1
9417,It was too advanced for me,1
9507,This course is not good in giving lessons with examples that will help a with studying for the quizzes.,1
9650,Did not go over determining a point on a graph of g from two functions but had it on the first quiz,1
9694,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.,1
9709,"A total waste of time -- not challenging at all in any aspect. It was quite funny that many word problems were identical with only some parameters changing :) Buckeyes... please, try harder next time :)",1
9799,It's better to watch the Youtube videos to understand the concepts.,1
9813,Very disappointing course. Far too much repetition. A lot of opinion based on scant evidence. It would have been much better as a 30 minute video without all the fluff and unsubstantiated inferences. I would not recommend this course.,1
9828,"This course is badly structured, with proposed tasks not being well oriented, and videos where teachers are constantly doubting and making mistakes. Not really happy with it.",1
9843,"There are serious issues in the IT infrastructure for this Online Course. Coursera needs to upgrade their IT infrastructure for it to be real time. You may go through the threads in Help for more information and issues posted by other users.Apart from this, it is extremely difficult to communicate with someone in Coursera regarding anything and in any form, i.e email, live chat, etc.",1
9899,i was very excited at the beginning of the coursebut when i figure out that i must paid for unlock some important lecturei really felt disappointed i thought i should only paid if i want to took the Certificatei had been wasted some time at this coursenow i have to search for another course but complete one this time.,1
9902,"Poor material, terrible french accent, not a good Android course at all.I don't raccoment it unless you're a total novice at Android development.",1
9914,"The free version of the course is far more restricted than other courses I've taken, the content wasn't brilliant, and it wasn't really more advanced than other tutorials with far better presenters which can be found online for free",1
9916,I thought it was free. I might was well go to Google to learn Android development.,1
9917,"You really need prior coding experience to understand the training. I also was very disappointed in the teaching. We have an incredible opportunity to improve education, and I feel that this course is merely an extension of current learning techniques. It was extremely difficult for me to fully participate without paying. I was using this course to make a specific android app to control my wheelchair. I act as an analyst for my programmer husband. So I fully understand code architecture, but absolutely hate coding by hand. This course glossed over coding however it is far more code intensive then I was led to believe.",1
9920,This is real boring I just learned that,1
9924,"not exciting, instructor too stiff and looked like reading a paper",1
9927,Can't finish even week 1 if you don't pay,1
9954,"It uses mixed material from other platforms meant for pure Python programming learning, jumps between sections in the external platform going forward and back so its pretty confusing to find problems involving content that you have no chance to know if you do not have previous experience with python. I would not recommend this course for beginners in programming.",1
9973,"Very badly linked with other websites that provide the actual content. This is more like a click-bait setup than the actual course. I'm not sure why it's even offered on Coursera, other than to make money on a more popular website using the content hosted by less popular one. Very bad experience.",1
9976,Frustrating as hell. Too much math and computer coding.,1
9983,"Again a course that comes with very simple (and not always good prepared) video lectures but for recieving a grade an enormous math knowledge is necessary, with no further help given",1
10056,"the quality of this course is very low, and the content are not interesting and useful at all.",1
10063,"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.",1
10074,This is a very bad course,1
10080,Very poor explanation and very complicated topics.,1
10082,"This course is supposed to be the most interesting, and most challenged one of this specialization. However i am quite disappointed with the instructor and the contents he put together. He speaks too fast without much clarity, and worst of all, i can tell most of the time he reads from the scripts without really conveying much knowledge about the contents.",1
10106,"I was unhappy with this. It was clear that this course was pulled together from a superset of other material, and that it was not checked for consistency or completeness. The students were tested on their ability to write down a specific phrase from a video rather than on application of the principles learned from utilization of the graph database tools. (Broccoli -- REALLY???)Further, the lack of response to questions posted in the forum indicates a lack of engagement from instructors and / or facilitators.",1
10112,"The material on graph analytics was of introductory level. A string of interesting ideas, with unclear explanations. The lesson on GraphX was basically a copy-paste introduction to it's abilities without actually teaching how to use it. The transcripts are full of mistakes. Someone not proficient in English or hard of hearing would be confused by them. It was somewhat difficult to understand the main lecturer. The best part was the explanation of Neo4j - and it was at an introductory level. A disappointment.",1
10130,"Too much technical. I would have preferred high level generic concepts. Also, the exercises were quite tricky for a beginner.",1
10135,"Not very engaging. Information overflow and poorly delivered lectures where the instructor is just reading from slides. I don't recommend paying for this, it is better to just check out the syllabus and read about this stuff online.Note to instructor: Very simple concepts were explained using overly complicated language. Also, please refrain from over using the word 'essentially'.",1
10157,The slides are unclear and very very ugly and old style.The assignment is very specific to Linux based machine.Only one programming assignment.More theory than practices.The QCMs don't really help understand. They are just about remembering values.I woudn't recommande this course since it is more like a book then it is like a course.,1
10195,"Can't actually be done as a free course, like others on the site; you have to pay just to get a quiz grade.",1
10307,"I cannot take the quizzes, because of money. The other courses let us take the quizzes without paying money. I dislike you paying policy. Please, let us take the tests without money payment.Sincerely,Garik",1
10374,It would be nice to see more detailed explanation instead of reading the lines in slides. Also there is less practical content for real time usage,1
10392,Only an introduction which was also not proper.,1
10396,Its very boring. Just someone reading off slides. One could read from a book instead. No examples or explanation to the information on the slides.,1
10400,it is very basic course just giving the introduction to a layman.,1
10405,very pedantic. course teacher just repeats the information on the slides verbatim. an interesting subject is made quite dull. would request more emphasis be put on presentation skills as the course material seems ok for a refresher,1
10416,"Poor context, no real examples. The guy just reads what is written on the slides without further explanations.",1
10461,Very Limited material.,1
10480,"It's almost desk work, not practical.",1
10481,not of a worth,1
10508,The contents of PPTs are just read out in the video lectures. It's as good as providing only the PPTs.,1
10567,The information is not presented well and the math is not always taught.,1
10600,"Poor lectures, inaccurate and incomplete information. Narrative about changing colors is reminiscent of Sal Khan. I just can't listen to any more of this.",1
10612,"Redundant, poor explanations and a complete lack of examples about the general concepts and the foundations of this discipline. The interaction between the teacher and the slides is limited to a reading exercise that does not provide any add value at all. Very dissapointed and still wondering if this course is worth my attention -and extremely limited time- or not. Plenty of room for improvement.",1
10613,"I have sat through 4 of the lessons and I am not very impressed. I fell that the topic is very interesting, but the professor does not do a very good job explaining the algorithms. It may be because I do no have the textbook, but overall a rather poor course. There need to be a little more explanation beyond the slides.",1
10617,too theoretical without enough practical quiz and assignment,1
10618,"Just read the slide., The presentations add very little since the presenter is (stumbling) over just reading the text on the slides.",1
10634,"This seemed more appropriate for a startup, and most of the content was rudimentary",1
10673,Rudimentary HR / new supervisor level information. Not specific to Data Science either.,1
10772,"This course deserves no starts. There were no instructors answering the many questions raised by the students. There were no explanations for wrong answers, and so no opportunity to learn. I was helping other students understand the assignments, and spent extra time grading submissions as no teaching assistants were available to help.There were a couple of very good teachers in the specialization, however the structure is critically flawed and your time would be better spent studying on your own.Avoid not just the capstone, but this entire series.",1
10776,"The capstone, just like the courses of the specialization are a strong illustration of the problems of higher ed.",1
10777,"Bad course. Things mentioned by the instructors are naive. According to my knowledge (my knowledge about Chinese philosophy come from A History of Chinese Philosophy, Youlan Feng; History of Chinese Philosophy, Sze-kwang Lao), that is not Chinese philosophy at all.",1
10829,"I think this course has very interesting information but it needs a way better format. It needs agile presentations, better, infographics, graphics and design and to be much more flexible and fun.I have not finished it but it does not make me get involved in the content even it is very interesting.It needs a better script and handling of the information to be able to conect with new students.",1
10869,"Very disappointed with the information provided. I went through the second week, completing all assignments and quizzes, but did not learn anything new. Most of the information provided is common knowledge anymore. I was also a little put off by the frequent self promotions by the instructor, in reference to his treatment center, organizations and book. I am withdrawing from the class.",1
10937,"It absolutely amazing course , I personally benefit a lot. really it's not just the certificate .Thank you Coursera for this huge chance.",1
11000,I learned very little from the course. The tests were easy. But that's because there was little to be learned.,1
11006,"very poor. even though for the most part I found the videos engaging, the course's overall structure doesn't help to 'read the novel together', as is stated in the title. the quizes are poorly written, even for me, a native russian speaker, it was often hard to understand the questions, and sometimes its plain guess work on the opinions of the course authors. often a required number of answers to pass a quiz is the same as the total number of questions in that same quiz. the essay's topics rarely correspond with the actual reading of the book. for the very first week the essay required knowledge of the book that hasn't been read yet by the participants. or it should be stated that one needs to read the book prior to taking the course. then again that would require the change of the course's name.",1
11022,bad course .. teaching was poor... assignments were very high level.. but teachings very of low profile,1
11040,"The lectures are unpolished and hard to follow, especially as the captions are inaccurate. The mathematics in the course are not explained clearly.",1
11044,"Need a good foundation with knowledge of calculus(integrals), electrical engineering and wave and acoustics. Not just a course to pick up for fun.",1
11047,Lectures have very poor teaching skills.,1
11062,"This course offered many interesting ideas about flipping school classrooms, but offered no suggestions about the practical methods to do so. As a teacher, I need to have realistic suggestions about the technology necessary to flip my math class, not a series of testimonials about how great it's going to be once my class is flipped.",1
11110,I did not find that this course added anything to what I already learned. Seems mainly a re-hash of prior material slimly disguising marketing pitch of other Northwestern courses.,1
11180,The structure of the lectures is not really effective.,1
11400,I would not recommend this course because the video lessons are quite poor. The teacher mostly reads notes from his iPad without a proper presentation or some kind of text.,1
11560,"Lightweight and marginally informative. While it is clearly aimed at a lay audience, a deeper presentation of the scientific foundations of the disorder is sorely needed. If you're interested in the etiology of autism, you'll need to look elsewhere.",1
11566,"I found it very easy. But if you do not know anything about Autism, I think you might would contribute from it.",1
11575,"I was really, really hoping that this course would be educational. I personally work with an individual with AS and I excepted to have a better insight into some of the things he goes through. So far, however, I have found many of the lectures condescending. As a person with a disability I find it highly offensive when people speak like they're doing the person with whatever kind of disability a favor for even helping them. People with disabilities are just that, people.",1
11623,the videos are too longassignments are difficultand dr asfahani is not like dr larryi loved dr larry much moredr asfahani is not interesting in his presentations at all,1
11627,"Good material, fair presentation, too many peer evaluations.",1
11651,Peer to peer assignments are really slow and due time dependent.,1
11665,"Instructor speaks too slow and sometimes hardly audible with my earphones plugged in with 100% sound. Incredibly slow paced. Coffee must!!! Too much of story and history and introduction. Much less material presented for concepts shown. Much of the lecture time is wasted on things which does not matter, for example Djikstra shortest path... I would be more interested to know about the algorithm than a huge lecture on who is Djikstra, and also would like to have some exercise to implement the same and realise. Very unsatisfied with the course. But there is no other courses offered for C++ programming language in English Language. Not worth the time.",1
11672,too hard in practice,1
11677,"I am highly disappointed with the policy of providing the homework only to the paid participants. It seems this is gearing towards another means of making bussiness when it comes to education.I understand that grading and providing feedback requires effort and the fees charged is required to the cover those cost, but like before we must have an option to get access to the homework, allowing us to apply our learning while it maybe be acceptable not to have any feedback or certificate on the course completion.Currently, the closed homework policy goes against the basic objectives of MOOC and I hope it is reconsidered.",1
11678,Very Boring!!,1
11681,"I've already written a review for part 1 and I have the same opinion about this one. The course is rather poor and not challenging. Only general information about relevant topics that as well read on wikipedia. No exercises, no code assignments. A lot of this content was repeated from first two parts of this specialization.",1
11733,"I had a very poor experience being graded by peers. Although the Capstone Project Assignment itself is EXCELLENT, the peer grading rubric is not. I was not fairly graded, and I am sure of this 100%.",1
11847,"I have studied some Bayesian Statistics before. I feel like the materials itself is not sufficient for entry level, and will actually confuse some of the learners. Anyway, this is just my two cents. :)",1
11938,Complete garbage...items not really presented in relevant details with respect to standard industry practices. What you will learn here is not how things are done on the job.,1
11957,"Not very applicable -just a bunch of concepts.It feels like a very disorganised course.Paul Harris is extremely repetitive and takes so much time to get to the point. Sometimes he over-explains unnecessary things. His lectures need serious upgrade.Lecturers speak too slow, I have to use the 1.5x speed not to fall asleep.",1
11978,"I do not recommend this course. It did not fill my expectations. I am not able to create application for mobile phone after finishing it.First 4 modules were somehow useful but since module 5 onward it is just waste of time, I did not learn anything useful, I did not learn how to code. Advices for sources were very shallow and it was not shown how to work with them. I could gain same information with basic search engine request.The teacher is nice and willing to give information to students. But unfortunatelly he did not prepare for recordings of videos. His speeches lacked structure and focus. Very often he was lost in talking and he often re-explained (in detail) staff which was already explained in previous videos. This caused that videos were too long considering the amount of knowledge that was provided to students and watching them was waste of time.The course was shallow, information did not go deep. Students participation was not supported (nor required) after 1 module.",1
11990,Outdated,1
12022,"I think that it would be a good idea to improve the grader, release more informative assignment information (take a look at the Algorithms course for example) and lecture materials in pdf format.",1
12087,"Inattentive lectures. There're only a few videos that are worth watching. You need to be prepared for wasting a lot of time for programming assignments -- it's not because the assignments are tough but because of poor descriptions and out of sync with lectures. If you're interested, just download the online material (not videos) and read through it. Much better than wasting your time with the lecture videos and assignments.",1
12102,Lots of bugs,1
12119,Week three quiz is real bad. I suggest you give it a try and see for yourself.,1
12150,"Taking this course in January/ February 2017, I found it to be jumbled, out-dated and frustrating.Materials are presented in a chaotic, roundabout way, which is neither chronological nor thematic, leaving huge lacunae. The initial lecture started with an entirely uncontextualised location-visit to Lewes, and mention of the Battle of Lewes in the Barons' War, with plenty of merry jumping over the *rather more important* Magna Carta. In later lectures, there is similar dancing around the English Civil War, which is shocking, given its constitutional importance... and then lots of vague, hand-wavy references to European law. I understand that these lectures were filmed before last summer's shock result in the EU referendum, but - honestly - would it have killed Professor Gearey to have discussed the context and possible implications of the referendum? By contrast, I'm currently following a Futurelearn course which is a repeat iteration of the original material (that's how online courses are viable - I understand that) BUT which the educator cared about enough to updated with topical material from the very week in which we were following it (Week 1 of President Trump)!It would have been far better to have gone into the Common Law course with clear historical anchors (e.g. Magna Carta, Civil War, Great Reform Act, EU membership), which would have given a proper framework for studying the development of common law, through cases and precedent. Instead, we get Professor Gearey sliiiiiiding into half a dozen subjects per lecture and then ""leaving that question there for a later lecture.""I must mention that other lecturer is much more coherent, and that he talks sensibly through various cases, actually demonstrating how precedent works. However, that's just not enough to make up for Professor Gearey's flibbertigibbet style of exposition, which seems to make up the bulk of the course.On a technical level, the un-corrected transcripts of ""lectures"" were a huge headache, since they didn't make much more sense than the lectures themselves, and at times made even less sense, due to incorrect transcriptions. It was particularly frustrating to have legal references mis-spelled (e.g. ""Blackstone"" as ""Blackspen""), making it difficult to track down better sources to supplement the lectures.I can't actually be bothered to see this course through to the end, and am very glad I didn't purchase it.",1
12154,"I have found this a deeply frustrating experience. The main lecturer, Professor Adam Gearey, clearly knows his subject well but is a terrible communicator. His lectures are poorly constructed, repetitious and sometimes confusing. He seems at times to be delivering the lecture as a stream of consciousness rather than a properly prepared lecture: as a result he sometimes misspeaks himself, for example saying that murder trials are conducted in the High Court rather than the Crown Court, and these errors have not been picked up and corrected. I am forced to wonder whether anybody in the University of London team bothered to quality check these videos. These problems are compounded by the uncorrected subtitles and 'transcripts' of the lectures, obviously done by somebody with no understanding of the subject. It is also frustrating that when I raised these concerns in the weekly discussion forum, I received replies from a volunteer moderator which were so badly written as to be almost unintelligible. This moderator made no attempt to enter into constructive discussion, but told me that 'you cannot say our professor is wrong because you disagree with him' and that I should 'read the sentence properly': in other words, no criticism, however constructive, can be tolerated. Even some of the questions in the quizzes are carelessly constructed: for example, the 'correct' answer to q8 in the final quiz uses the word 'allowed' (which implies an element of discretion) instead of 'required', which would have properly reflected the provision in question (s.6 HRA 1998 - 'the authority could not have acted differently' ). All in all, the presentation of this course falls far short of the academic standards I expected from a university with London's reputation.",1
12170,Really badly organised. Course lectures are interesting however end of section quizes have no relevance to the material taught. There are no external links or additional relevant material attached to even link the question to the lessons taught.,1
12226,"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.",1
12228,"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.",1
12231,I thought it was going to be good. Did the first week videos and Lectures. But I feel cheated because it will not let me take the quiz to move on without paying for the course. No where did I ever see anything that said ahead you had to pay -- if you didn't want a certificate or to do the whole specialization. Coursera used to be a platform I used and recommended. No more.,1
12237,Way too much reading material. Not enough video lectures/ explanations. The professor also needs to speak a little slower for people to follow.,1
12251,"Cannot believe UCI have just very short course, compared to san diegi/Duke/Virginia/Copnehagan who have courses worthing thousands of dollars for free as compared to this one. UCI have exception course in objective C which is worth the money to be paid, but this series, are extremely below the expected standard",1
12280,The test questions are abysmal.,1
12292,"It very short and brief. I was thinking it will also emphasise and help us to grow our communication skills for the 21st century communication, but it's just a brief explanation of some changes and nothing more.",1
12297,The link to down,1
12298,"I paid the course and the course seem to be no longer supported, I tried without success to switch session , in summary : You paid and don't get to follow the course, incredible :-( ....... !",1
12338,The course is a wonderfulBut the idea of a peer and the final assignment a very badYou need to wait ... for several days and a waste of your time in order to be assessed by other peopleThese people may be incompetent and give you a zero for no reasonAnd lost your effort and your time,1
12372,Disappointed by the course content ( except for the 4th week).The course content is US specific which has no relevance for international students. How am I bothered about Obama care or other american statutes?!!,1
12377,Too US-centric. Very strange concept of non-monetary benefits. It very common to forgo cash remuneration for non-monetary benefits (mainly for tax advantages) which was largely ignored in this course.,1
12395,"I think the last project was very badly positioned and explained. First the Coursera is using Cloudera VM, but if you execute and run the Cloudera Express to set the Cloundera environment up the Coursea exercises do not run There should be a warning!. If you do then the simplest Jupyter exercise it fails - this took me about 10 hours to figure out.Then for the final Project, technically to succeed you must miss country names in all lower case and you cannot match with countries with a 'space' e.g. 'Cape Verdi' and if you try to take any of this into account you do not get the same numbers to pass the test. There needs to be some warning on how to interpret and manage the files so that you get the same numbers being asked for in the test. Again this too me about 10 hours to resolve. Both resolutions ONLY because another colleague is doing the same course and we problem solved together. THIS IS AN AWFUL EXERCISE in frustration due to incomplete details. Not a learning exercise. Just AWFUL....",1
12403,"I have enrolled in this twice but can't see the course content. Every time I click ""go to course"" I get directed to the description of the course. Where are the lecture videos and other course content?",1
12431,"Poorly designed, no help whatsoever from the staff, Forum is totally worthless. Worst course I ever had on Coursera.",1
12451,I tried giving zero stars. This course is very poor. In particular the last portion of the class wherein you are tested on things that were not taught. If I had wanted to spend hours in google trying to learn this stuff I would not have spent money on this course.,1
12455,The course cost too much for the gain of knowledge. Feels like this course could be merge with the first or the third course.,1
12456,"Forcing users to install demo software which requires a registration is just too lame.Other than that, courser is very boring, introductory, jumps constantly between things and doesn't explain much. Stack overflow and 2 hours would do a better job.",1
12538,Got lost and left behind very quickly even after watching videos numerous times and doing additional research. There were videos missing even with deadlines approaching. Some videos were very well explained while others I didn't understand at all.,1
12679,"The course content is very poorly explained. The quiz questions don't really test what was taught in the lectures, and the assignments are just copying and pasting things. I feel like I still have a very poor understanding of what was supposedly covered in the course. I cannot generalise or apply the 'learned' information or skills to other topics or researches because I didn't actually understand the core concepts or how to use the programs.",1
12685,"This is another course in UCSD's ""Big Data"" introductory course. The material is not pertinent to a specialty on big data technologies. Further the course does not increase one's knowledge of Machine Learning in any way that justifies spending the time in the course.",1
12760,"Unfortunately this course consists of the Professor reading his notes very quickly with rapid listing of concepts and very little time spent explaining complex topics. The quizzes emphasize the terms for various elements of the analysis rather than teaching how to work with the tools to analyze data. There does not seem to be anyone monitoring the course forum and mistakes in quiz questions and questions asked on the forum are not answered or replied to by anyone. I was committed to working with the course but by week 4 it was unfortunately impossible to absorb and there was no way to interact with anyone to get help. I'm sure there is room for improvement on this course and I hope the instructor does work to improve with the course, but currently the course is disappointing as a learning experience.",1
12803,Only fit for absolute morons and perfect ignorants. No content value whatsoever. I don't understand why Coursera allowed this one to happen to be on the Coursera website.,1
12804,"Most of the effort in the creation of this course seems to have gone into the visual and acoustic effects of the slides. The first week's material has no substance whatsoever (literally!). The second week' s presentations are just listings of lengthy definitions and ""Best practices"" which in fact are mostly goals, not practices.With the poor quality of the provided videos, my hope was that the reading would be better. But the second week's reading are uncommented links to a 270 page NIST document, an Open Online Course(!!!) and OWASP material.At this point it is clear that continuing the course is not going to help me in the way I would expect it from a course. When I compare this to the excellent Software Security course of Michael Hicks (University of Maryland) , which I also attend on Coursera, there are worlds between both.I understand that ""Cybersecurity and its Ten Domains"" addresses students with less prior knowledge, but especially for such students I would expect a much better didactic approach.One star seems harsh, but after the first two weeks, the only words I find for this are: ""seriously?""",1
12805,"Content is very weak, sounds that are used very annoying...",1
12809,"Not very helpful, very stessfull music and only read definitions, do discussion or explanations to go deeper into the topic.",1
12813,The design of this course seems rather lazy. There should have been more meaningful contents and discussions in the videos.,1
12821,"No content, essentially you just read a textbook. The videos are about 5 minutes per week.",1
12827,"Content very light, near of empty course.",1
12832,"This Course is a total scam. In doubt? Sign up for the free version and go watch the videos. Each video is only 1-2 minutes long, so you can watch all 7 weeks in half an hour ( speed 1.5). O, I forgot they also include a link to a 4 years old TED talk, FUn but not really relevant.This course is a disgrace to Coursera. It ought to be removed.",1
12838,Not recommend. Very basic and videos are only 2 - 3 minutes.,1
12849,"the only reason to take this course is because the certification will look good on your resume. don't expect to learn anything new if you are already in IT or related field. i passed the tests without going over the material. there is a shortage of original content, although their graphics and effects department did a good job, and mostly they expect you to read outside resources.audit the course for free to get familiar with the content but only pay if you need the certification for professional reasons.",1
12850,"I DON'T recommend this course AT ALL. This college doesn't spend much effort to structure this course - just putting short videos (less than 10mins in total per a week) and external references (which someone else wrote). The assignments are just open discussion among students and have ourselves evaluate with each other. I haven't learn anything from this course. It's just a waste of time and money. Coursera should inspect this course otherwise these skeptical courses can deteriorate the reputation of this MOOC platform - I love the other courses/specializations provided by other universities though,",1
12851,"3 introduction videos each week, and tons of links for reading?Do not want.The worst course I ever took.Not enough Video material with good explanations. All we got - links to articles which we can found ourselves without any help.",1
12855,The high video production values of this course fail to hide the abysmal lack of content. With approximately 4 mins per week of video charging $49 for this course is a disgrace. Potential students should save their money and read the relevant Wikipedia pages.,1
12860,"I expected much more. The course material is really weak, did not improve my knowledge about Cyber Security. I am very disappointed, also cos I payed 30 dollars to a certificate. I do not recommend this course",1
12865,This is not a course - each session is 4 mins or less...,1
12875,A collection of links to other sites and short and highly generic videos,1
12902,I wish they spent more time on the content of videos and less on the silly effects and 30-second intro and outro sequences. Practically every question of the final comes word-for-word from a book not assigned in the module readings and not available for free to students for them to study. I won't be taking any other courses from this school if this course was an indication of quality.,1
12904,"I didn't like it. It's all theoretical and there isn't any practice.Also, they didn't send me an accomplishment like the other courses that I already done.",1
12907,"This is my first course in coursera.Cons:Information redundancy, unnecessary required reading.Extend some information that only need few hours to study to a 6 weeks courses.Pros:There are some useful basic concepts & frames",1
12916,"Videos way too short, annoying music/animations, lots of stereotypes (floating 0's and 1's, really?).This doesn't seem like a serious course provided by a university.",1
12922,"The videos are too short, without enough information about the topics. You have to read a lot, Actually, this course doesn't look like as others Coursera's courses and I don't recommend it.",1
12928,all on demand flow are bad. difficult to follow and see where we are and what is left...,1
12938,Too elementary. I would recommend this course for non-technical managers or security/coding beginners under the age of 13.,1
12939,I did not find the lectures at all informative and the readings were not targeted enough to understand what items required focus and what information was more background. I did not find the course especially helpful.,1
12954,A new generation of MOOC with REL available for free on the web as teaching ressources!Already got that elsewhere...,1
12957,"Video content barely summarizes the outline of each module. The questions in the quiz are not ""though provoking"". Peer discussion are rather superficial and do not cover half the content of the course.Readings are OK, show good sources, but there is no real discussion about them in the videos or in the quizzes.",1
12968,"animations, animations and animations...",1
12969,"The content of the videos are just some engineer citing with some brief headline of security, it's lacking of depth and explanation, totally wasting my time !!",1
12986,"Minimal video efforts, not enough content, and long readings. Definetly not a good course to get a verified certificate",1
12990,"Short lectures, long intro, ridiculous music. Very quickly decided to learn this elsewhere.",1
13186,"Very confusing course, unclear example, too theoretical (very limited relevancy to business questions)Also, presentation format could be improved (tables are not intuitive to read/understand)",1
13201,Very confusing subject which could have been better presented.,1
13234,Not the expected quality,1
13418,To be honest I don't think this is worth the money.,1
13479,"This review does not reflect the course content. The new Coursera UI makes it impossible to download transcripts or slides of the videos. Without these features, following the lectures is significantly more difficult, and I can't rate this course any higher than 1 star. I would rate it zero stars if that was possible.",1
13493,To lock assignments for money is disgusting.,1
13526,Tree exercise had absolutely no relevant video material. Videos give zero context for why data structures are important or when they are used....Should take a lesson from the Stanford course.,1
13564,"I'm honestly quite pissed. The material itself is fine but I have had a terrible experience working with the instructors. I don't think I will continue taking these courses.I don't appreciate the amount of time and effort given into the programming assignments only to receive practically zero help. First of all, I don't know WHY I'm failing the test cases, I just am. Your program runs through maybe 100 tests to ensure correctness but somehow the instructors decide you should only see the first 3. But then, I try posting on the forums to receive help only to have it removed. Quite frankly, I have spent well over 10 hours at this point on a single problem and I've created my own tests and I have looked at all the very vague hints given in the forums and I still have no clue what to do. I have school, a job, and yet I'm losing all this productivity because I'm running all these damn tests hoping on the off-chance that I catch whatever weird bug it is that's failing my code. All I want is real, concrete feedback.",1
13583,"Worse than the first course. I expected something that is not academic-like explanation, which I can't find it here.Please bring back those explanations style similar to the first course.",1
13601,"I found the wording of the assignments really difficult to follow so I didn't really understand what was expected of me. I spend a lot of time (and therefore money!) on this course but in the end I made a conscious decision to stop. I was taking it for personal pleasure and it was not worth the stress each week of trying to work out what was being asked. I have taken a number of other courses in creative writing elsewhere, and other courses on Coursera - this is the first one I have actively chosen to stop because I just wasn't engaging with it - either for education or for enjoyment.",1
13620,Auditing is pretty useless with how this class is updated. I can't get peer reviews so my assignments get zero feedback. Coursera didn't used to be like this.Asked about how to be more involved in class discussions and peer reviews a couple days ago and haven't received feedback.,1
13716,"The peer reviewed assignments are next to useless, as there is no oversight on them. I think there needs to be a basic comprehension assessment done first, before allowing fellow learners the ability to pass/fail students in the course.",1
13721,"Course is a little formulaic, had trouble making my submissions follow the structure outlined but still, I learnt some useful tips and actually got to just write something orderly.Liked some of the visiting speakers (the third speaker who talked about character - mature lady, dark hair) was quite good. So was the first gentleman.Overall, the course is ok but given the strict methodology and requirements for writing, I don't know if I'll make it through the specialisation.Thank you for reading!",1
14046,A simple list of programs that needed to be installed would cover 90% of the course content. Some of this content is also repeated in other courses in the sequence. If you have any technical skills this entire course is extremely tedious.,1
14135,"I have no idea why you called it course, since there was nothing inside.",1
14193,Very basic and boring,1
14269,Not worth 29$ considering you could take away very little from this course.,1
14306,Too compact and short. Should be integrated to other courses.,1
14361,"I have absolutely no idea how could this become a separate course - and one spread over 4 weeks. It is extremely basic, extremely general and extremely high level. It should be compressed to 1-2 hours and added as an _optional prerequisite_ to other courses in this specialization. I personally feel cheated out of my 29 USD.0.1 star.",1
14373,"I was expecting 4 weeks of work, but it was more like 4 hours.",1
14426,this course is very poorly structured.,1
14478,"$38 is a lot to pay for tutorials about how to install software. This course takes only 20 minutes to complete. It is also obsessed with command line interfaces. There's a reason that they were left behind in the 80s. It does cover GUI software like Rstudio, which is ignored for the rest of the course. How about something on the desktop Github version? https://desktop.github.com/ So much easier to use.",1
14479,Is this a real course for a data scientist just installing shit and a peer reviewing for that screenshot and forking all repos ...very bad not worth to be with rest course in specialization,1
14513,very basic.,1
14536,$40 is way too much to spend just to learn how to install a couple pieces of software and sign up for a GitHub account. The entire course should have been the first week of the following course.,1
14563,"This should not be a course. It's just introduction and should be condensed to one video and a handout with pointers to those who need more specific and detailed instructions for setting up their computers. This is not a learning course. All they teach you how to install git, R and Rstudio. And they take money for this (if you want to say you ""completed"" the course)!!! Highly unethical practice in my opinion.The surveys are stupid too. They don't distinguish between those who completed (but not earned any credentials) and those who didn't.In my opinion this is a very dumbed down version of an introduction to a data science course (and not a cours in itself). Definitely not worth 4 weeks!A much more valuable course is Stanford's ""Machine Learning"" where you can actually learn something (and don't force you out of evaluation if you don't pay).",1
14626,Didn't learn anything in this one.,1
14643,"Complete waste of time. This should be a course on its own, and much less be charged for. This should have been the 1st week of an actual class. This only dealt with installing a couple of software tools. Hopefully the following courses will teach something worthwhile.",1
14675,"In my opinion, most of this information should be free and available as a pre-req. for other classes (installing R Studio).It was cheap, but in general, I thought I was going to be more out of this course than I did.",1
14680,"They charge you to take a class that explains how to install a few programs. If you go to the program's websites, there is directions to install it anyway, so this was completely unnecessary. Waste of money. This class should give you some early training on R before throwing it at you in the next course without enough training.",1
14718,Useless. The information content is close to zero. Just some blah-blah and a long tutorial to install software.,1
14730,"waste of time. except for git and github ,nothing much is in it.",1
14741,Way too basic for the price - almost no content - this is just setup - I resent paying for setup instructions.,1
14774,The course is not updated.,1
14780,This should not be a course in itself,1
14790,"By far to expansive for what you get. Anyway, thanks for the hint about swirl.",1
14806,"This course was a loss of time and money. Except from week 3 material, the rest can be found on the internet and should be required by everyone who wants to take that specialization. This course doesn't worth it, it's just to take extra money from anyone who wants to learn about Data Science.",1
14807,"Some interesting concepts, but way to simplistic in my opinion. Only reason I see to pay for it is the fact that it is a requirement in the Data Science Specialization",1
14809,"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.",1
14823,Too expensive for what you get :(,1
14832,"most part of this course is a duplicate of the ""R programming"" course.microphone/sound of the teacher quality is very bad.not original, boring, dividing this in ""4 weeks"" is too ridiculously long, this should be done in 1 week to enable users to take more time for the ""R programming"".this course should be free. don't lose too much time on it, it's doable in a day or a weekend and move on to ""R programming"".asking for so much money to see how to install R and github is a shame.feels like this course has been added just to have a round number for the specialization.even the survey in the end asking for feedback starts with a question not adapted to moment it's been asked ""did you get a certificate?"" of course i did not as i've just finish the course and now wait for my peers to review my final submission.",1
14853,"It has almost no content and isn't actually useful. I've heard later classes in the series are way tougher, so the ramp up isn't at all good.",1
14881,"The course does not warrant the price, it has way too little information. Very dissatisfied.",1
14901,Not useful at all if it's audited.,1
14929,Not worth the price. Extremely basic stuff spread very thin over too much time just to be able to charge for it.,1
14953,"Certainly not worth paying for this course, only talks about how to install the tools.Not able to take quizzes when you try to take the course for free.",1
14969,"Good introductory course. However, an overkill as a separate course (and hence charging $30 for it). Courses 1 and 2 could have been clubbed together.",1
14989,This course must be a part of another courseres.,1
15064,I think there are only few contents.,1
15083,"Although the content is correct, quality models videos and materials is very low, wanted to make all the specialization, but I'm not satisfied with the quality of the course. It's a shame, because the JHU is an excellent University",1
15091,Too basic content.I have not learned anything with this course (installing R and RStudio should not be part of exercises or lectures).I hope R programming course will be better,1
15103,"Not really enough content to be a course in it's own right, should be additional material as is useful, but definitely not a requirement.",1
15185,"Very short and just a basic overview on how to install a few tools that most of them I already had installed. All this course content could be packed into an introductory lesson instead of having to pay for it. I abandoned the specialisation because of this, I know it's a big business but at least you need to offer some value for the money",1
15229,"It is really basic course, I expected much more even if this is offered only for $29.. (the cheapest course in the specialisation)",1
15250,Completely useless. Just a number of boring videos of what you may possibly learn in Data Science Specialization.,1
15271,It's a course which is designed to preview the other courses. It could easily be eliminated,1
15292,"This was advertised as a six week course, but the deadlines make it a two week course. The assignments are exceptionally challenging given that the instructors offer now actual instruction on how to perform them. Two and a half days into the course not a single moderator has answered a question in the forums and I can't find a way to contact Coursera about this problem.I am very disappointed. I was planning on taking additional courses through the Coursera platform, but now I am reconsidering.",1
15293,"I am disappointed because the course doesn't provide profound material on data analysis with python. The videos are too short and the samples demonstrated in the videos aren't thoroughly explained. For instance, the speaker often only says what she is doing but not WHY she is doing it or what the function of a particular parameter is. I felt left alone and forced to google. In my opinion it cannot be the purpose to make your student google basic things that could easily be integrated into the course.Considering that this is labelled as a beginner course I was expecting much more theoretical input. Other courses offer additional slides and scripts that are aligend with the course videos and allow the students to look things up.",1
15299,Terrible. A waste of time and money. I recommend doing Statistics with R from Duke instead. This one should be taken off coursera.,1
15312,Totally just marketing materials! Don't waste your time with this school at all! You cannot learn a program in a couple of minutes!,1
15322,"The professor and instructors don't understand how to properly write SAS programs and ignored constructive feedback. It's very sad to see students follow suit by producing hard to read codes, ignoring programming conventions.As an analytic leader in healthcare industry (I am supervising some of my junior level team members to get some basic training), I want to say something to the students graduated from this course: if you program the same way as being taught, you will lose a competitive advantage during job interview.",1
15323,"This course didn't talk too much about data management and visualization, which made me feel quite disappointed. And you couldn't feel you could practiced what you learned in the course in the assignment. Most part of the assignment just focused on making some comments.",1
15342,This course states that it is for people with no knowledge in SAS. I had to go online elsewhere to learn SAS before completing this course. There are free SAS tutorials on the SAS webpage - I highly recommend completing them before trying this course.,1
15366,"Very disappointed about this course. The topic is very interesting, for me at least, but the course organization is horrible. Lectures do not provide enough information to complete the assignments. Zero interaction from course staff. Issues with getting assignments graded. In previous session the staff just refered you to the coursera helpdesk, but you cannot easily contact coursera directly.Main focus of course seems to be earning money and not educating. Be warned and don't pay for this course!I really don't get why this course has so many good reviews.",1
15370,"The highest video production values of any class I've seen on Coursera so far. Unfortunately, that's the best part of the class; the support is simply nonexistent (a post by someone associated with the staff from a previous run of the course suggests getting help troubleshooting Python from Coursera staff), the instructions for the class software are out of date, the source material for the assignments is sometimes unsuitable to the task you're asked to perform (e.g. statistical analysis on a data set aggregated from disparate sources), and the pretty videos are at times completely unrelated to the actual assignments (the very first week with the literature review). Dropping this specialization like a hot coal; it looked quite promising, but the aggravation over the poor organization and lack of support considerably outweighs anything I could get out of it.",1
15381,"Bad material, poor graphics, wrong mc questions in videos.More hype content than a course.This is not the way to learn Python, seriously don't take this one",1
15385,"The support from the faculty and the website is beyond explainable bad. The user interface gets stuck without reasons. There is no direct way to contact the faculty, if you are stuck on any assignments. There is hardly anyone who responds to the feedback that is sought for!!I will never recommend someone to do this course.",1
15559,It was not w,1
15573,This is mostly a sales pitch for the professor's book (you're required to purchase the book for the class).,1
15624,I wouldn't recommend this course to anyone who's paying. The assignments instructions are too vague to understand and there's no example given.,1
15642,"The peer reviewed assignments are next to useless, as there is no oversight on them. I think there needs to be a basic comprehension assessment done first, before allowing fellow learners the ability to pass/fail students in the course.",1
15821,Very elementary coursework. Quizzes were too simple while I expected some challenging questions that'll make you think. Please improve the assignment quality.,1
15877,"Not what I expected. Though the lecturer quite patronising and the exercises too juvenile. Did not finish the course, so it may have improved after the first few sessions. Thank you.",1
15879,I don't see how the assignments would make me a more creative person. Some of the content was new and interesting but overall I din't think it was a good use of my time.,1
15881,"elementary school level program, not college or university",1
15884,"Creativity without a reason, without a real problem/question. Divergent thinking per se. Try to be divergent just to be divergent. Too simplistic, doesn't worth your time.",1
15885,"the course delivery is regrettably boring. The 90-second breaks don't work very well. The lecturer is not trying to be engaging or at least pleasant to listen to. I hope he lectures this way in the attempt of being clear. However, it comes across as being very monotonous and boring. I had a strong motivation to follow the course, but honestly had to drop without completing the second lecture. A missed opportunity.",1
15886,Lesson 1 - no longer available via PCLesson 1 no longer exist to do via PC on internet.Sugggested . It has been removed. Cannot go ahead without having the Lesson 1 information.,1
15899,"The assignments do not give you any practical methods for actual problem solving. They're just a succession of activities that pretend to be creative by making you do things ""you wouldn't normally do"". It's like they forgot the part about ""problem solving"".The assignments are to eat foods you've never eaten, talk to people you wouldn't normally talk to, take a photo of yourself smooching someone/something, and to ""give"" something to someone you ""never have given anything before"". That is not creative nor helpful at problem solving. It's just a series of activities for people who have too much time on their hand and need something to do to get out of their routine.Not a course I would recommend for anyone wanting to gain useful skills.",1
15901,Not a course that helps you solve wicked problems which do not have solutions that will come suddenly one fine day and ones that require more thought effort and brainstorming.,1
15903,"After about one hour the only things I learnt is to do ""stuff"" in different way (too vague concept) and the basic of photography.",1
16018,This course doesn't offer much of a learning curve. I would rather suggest taking Data Visualization Using Tableau by Duke University.,1
16021,"Poor course. No original material, they use Tableau training material. I did the first 4 weeks of the course in 5 hours and learned nothing new, except using Tableau. I could have learned the same using the Tableau first video in 10 minutes.",1
16034,Easy but really complicate to submit the assignment.,1
16036,"nothing special, I do understand this are fundamentals, but i felt like 5 year old",1
16066,I'm sorely disappointed. I learned almost nothing valuable and found the content to be so basic that I didn't get a good feel for Tableau. I paid $20 elsewhere (UDEMY) and I'm learning a SHIT TON about Tableau through them. Tableau has great free resources too that are better than what I paid $80 for on Coursera. This class is a joke and not worth $80. As a UCD Alumni I'm embarrassed my school's name is on this.,1
16075,This class was really lacking. The content was skimpy and the assignments overly simple and rote.,1
16083,"Very basic in terms of material covered. Would be nice as a free remedial class in prep for the main specialization. Homework assignments were confusing and did not appear to have been reviewed by the instructors before being sent to students (main problem, the free software students use was not the same version as that being used to develop the homework). Instructor support was not evident in the user forums. Below the quality of the free classes taken in the past.",1
16087,"This course is terrible for many reasons. Firstly, the amount of content is ridiculously small - only about 20 minutes of video lectures per week. Moreover, more than 50% of content is just non-relevant.Secondly, practical assignments are very poorly planned:1) in weeks 3 peer graded assignment students are asked to save Tableau workbooks as twbx files, even though this feature is not supported by Tableau Public that is used in this course. The assignment itself is just opening and saving file in Tableau.2) in weeks 4 peer graded assignment you just asked to write some vaguely defined 1 page description. It doesn't include any Tableau-related activities.Thirdly, quizzes are ambiguous and very general.Overall, this course is just a waste of time. For comparison, you can easily get more useful information about Tableau from the 4 minute long ""Getting started"" video on the Tableau website than from this course. Just wonder how Coursera allows such courses to be places on the platform.",1
16117,They say that if you don't have anything good to say it's better not to say anything at all.,1
16119,"This is a good course for deciding if you want to pursue a more advanced degree in Cryptography, Computer Science, or Mathematics, but As part of a Cyber Security specialization, your paying customers are most likely working professional engineers or programmers, interested in practical applications of cryptography that they can use in order to create secure systems and services. This is a mathematics course and your paying customers are not going to use the knowledge from this course in their jobs. This is not an indictment of the instructor, but of the content itself. It is the wrong content for your target customer.",1
16147,I found some slides to be inaccurate which makes the material difficult to learn. Also I found the instructor's presentation style to be too abstract. I think a more practical style would be more suitable.,1
16186,nothing in common with reality. nothing that can prepare for real interviewuseless loss of time,1
16204,Complete waste of time. I could learn the interview skls anywhere.,1
16381,too mechanistic. not much creative modules.,1
16384,"The material itself isn't bad, but the course instructors never respond to questions. What's the point of the class if I can't get my questions answered?",1
16430,Professor is very knowledgable but he is fast... Even before i can understand the first line. he is on the fourth line. i find Hard to keep up with him. I am dropping this course.,1
16578,"In my opinion this is not a course. The contents are a short interview cut up over 4 weeks, fluffed with a myriad of vendor-biased PDFs. The 90s classroom style video editing is annoying to boot.",1
16627,Coursera and this course sucks. You are at the mercy of idiots doing your peer review.,1
16629,"This is the worst course I have ever seen in my life, I'm ain't lying these guys use the terms which they haven't thought and they use it so frequently as if they have thought it, One who were teaching may be industrial experts and have lot's of experience, but one thing to note is:Teaching is an art...",1
16632,horrible,1
16641,In wk3 my DB is totally messed up and I do not know where to find the CORRECT create statements to recreate the DB that the assignments expect! It shouldn't be too difficult to provide one page that gives the commands to execute to create the DB that is used in each week (for each week separately). Due to that I'm un-enrolling from this course.,1
16708,assingnments are not grading .so i do not have reason to study something that can't finish,1
16732,"Avoid this course like the plague. Terribly taught, no support, problems only vaguely related to the course material, and designed to force you to buy the manual for the course. The next classes in the specialization get even worse, with the student forums full of students who can't get any help though the grueling process of installing Oracle, Pentaho, etc. on a personal laptop. I was fortunate to have experience with the tools, would have never managed to finish the course just based on the terribly taught material.",1
16743,Severe lack of support (zero) from the professor or TAs. Some wrong solutions were provided for assigments but were never addressed or acknowledged that it will be fixed. Some assignment files are not Mac friendly or is just not viewable by all students (I can't tell). Materials are quite good but grading is subject to broad interpretations and there is no human to provide guidance on what are the best practices. To think that I paid for the specialisation in order to take the graded assignment AND I have to do the grading BUT I do not receive support? This is ridiculous. I will have to think three times before I pay for a Coursera course in the future. Never again. I will not recommend this to others.,1
16815,"Course material was interesting but very rudimentary, the courses biggest challenge was understanding its spoken English. I do not recommend this course.",1
16823,"The lectures are very well-organized. The topics are also cover in this field. However, the lectures are very dry and boring. The main professor were reading the scripts on the monitor. From my perspective, with his knowledge in this field as being described on his personal web site, he should be able to talk comfortably by looking at the topic on the slide then discuss about it in detail. I would suggest to change the environment to be at the wide open space, like coffee shop, to make this course more attractive. I'm sorry, it is not what I expected.",1
16835,The same information was covered in multiple lessons. It was a very conceptual look at cyber conflicts that you could get if you paid attention to the news over the last five years.,1
16836,"I'm sorry that I'm going to sound harsh, but this course is useless.It touches so many different topics without going deeply into any of them. All you get is a basic knowledge about All Things Cyber™.The recommended readings are all over the place, the video captions look like they're just a basic speech recognition and like nobody actually proof read them. They're full of errors. Lecturers say one word, captions show a completely different word. Plus, they're full of spelling errors. (Kadafi regime in Libya!? Really!?)You can get the same amount of knowledge by reading two or three Wikipedia pages. Don't waste your time on this course.",1
16857,Sways between incorrect definitions and buzz words to word dense academic papers. Lacks clarity to the point of bringing the providers expertise in to question (only those who understand a concept and have relevant experience have a hope of explaining it) . Calls in to question the motive of the course and coursera - this seems more like marketing or pre-sales than it does education.,1
16859,Not worth wasting your time over: they state that which is blatantly obvious and provide little insight into human factors of security.,1
16863,"Too much statistics, too much coding and inadequate instruction. This is not a coding specialization and if I wanted to learn coding I would have taken a coding course! This 9 weeks course has been a nightmare!",1
16864,"This is the specialisation that sucks all joy out of the entire course. 6 month on and I am still on week 2. The software and the provided files are not fully working, something is always missing, constant error messages... If you don't have background in statistics, you will have a very difficult time.",1
16870,NOT FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW R TOOL!This course needs an interesting approach to keep students wanting to study. The teaching method was boring. The professor was reading things from the screen 90% of the times (he looked bored himself). The topics covered in this course need more time for students to understand 10 weeks are insufficient.,1
16873,Too much theory less practical things.,1
16876,Way to technical,1
16885,"Much more emphasis on statistical analysis than on experimental design. Seems out of place with the rest of the specialization in terms of both length and subject matter. Course assessments seem to test in-depth knowledge of coding in R (which isn't gone over in sufficient detail in lectures, rather students are told to look it up in more detail on their own; however, the class is already longer and more in-depth than all the others in the specialization!) more so than experimental design or statistics. Should be less detailed, or split into multiple courses, or at least should have an introductory lesson(s) or prerequisite course on basics of how R works - I found it extremely frustrating trying to learn about and conduct statistical analyses in a system of which I had only minimal working knowledge.",1
16886,"Neither statistics nor R was covered in any meaningful way. At the end of the course, you are left with frustration for having to jump through the loops, but no understanding of the principles. I am a college instructor for Statistics, having graduated from a PhD program - even with that background I could not follow the instructor.The course designer never considered the audience, and never identified the goals of this course. The instructor was lost between teaching R and teaching stats, so in the end he did neither. Worst course I have ever taken, both online and face-to-face.",1
16890,"Omigod! You're kicking this off in R-studio and teaching the whole course from this interface? Could you at least use a pen with ink that we can read when you're not in R?!This might be the last straw for me in this specialization. Nothing about this subject matter is easily digestible for a designer, and I'm okay with that. (I'm also a web/js developer, so I'm used to intense struggles with really abstract stuff.)What I can't get over is that this is part of an interaction design specialization that teaches design concepts, but whose instructors almost never practice those concepts in their pedagogy. ""Do as I say, not as I do"" seems to be the prevailing MO. The whole effort seems totally half-baked, and nowhere more so than in this course.I might not be so harsh if there weren't such great examples of well designed pedagogy elsewhere in Coursera, and for material that's at least as dry as statistics.",1
16893,"This was the most arduous undertaking I have ever been through. My frustration is not with professor Wobbrock, who is obviously an expert in his field (though sometimes I felt like he's speaking in ""High Valyrian"" and not English). My disappointment lies with UCSD which included the course of such depth of information and a strong requirement for understanding R, without much thought on whether students will be able to follow. I feel that going through this course was largely pointless, because I'm not going to retain much of the depth of the material in the long run.Based solely on this experience, I'm NOT going to be recommending this specialization to anyone.",1
16899,"As a stand-alone course this would be very good. The presenter is engaging and clearly knowledgeable, and the treatment of the course subject is thorough and well-designed. Grounding UX design in rigorous statistical analysis is important.BUT as a component of the Interaction Design specialisation it was much too long (nine weeks, as long as the previous three courses combined) and the coursework was un-interesting (long sequences of statistical tests with strange names) and very different to the creative and interactive assignments in the other courses. It very quickly turned into a demoralising ""death march"" for me.As part of the specialisation, this course needs to be slimmed-down radically, and perhaps complemented by other analytical approaches to UX and interaction design. In its current form, the inclusion of this course in the Interaction Design specilisation is represents an error of judgement.",1
16900,"I took up to week 2 and, so far, this course assumes statistics knowledge. I expected it would provide a background on the rather than just run a code and show the results.",1
16907,"I think the intention behind including this course was probably well meaning. I think it was a punishing course to get through for those of us who had no background in statistics, scientific studies, or programming. While I was able to fail my way forward through it, it was completely overwhelming, and overly painful. I really think the expectation should be set before students sign on to the specialization, as was I wonder how many students gave up on the whole Interaction Specialization after this course. Prof. Wobbrock was great, but I think there was a lot of vocabulary assumed to be known to us that just wasn't. I felt like I had been dropped down on Mars.",1
16910,"I'm really sorry to give this rating, but I have no choice. The course was horrendously boring, and so far removed from the interesting and interactive work that we had done in the previous sections of the Specialisation. This is such an unfortunate course to have as a requirement to complete the Specialisation, and especially the final hurdle to get into the Capstone. Moreover it was the longest of all the courses. Thus the least interesting and also the longest - makes little sense!As I said, I'm sorry to give this rating, but it needs to be said. The teacher seems like a great guy. And I'm sure he's killing it teaching statistics and R Studio at Uni, but using R studio to such a standard just doesn't seem like the everyday work an HCI designer would do. A statistician or data specialist yes, but a UI designer?Perhaps you could make the course higher level, avoid the indepth R Studio, and make it 3-4 weeks like all of the other courses.",1
16911,"Disappointed ... very technical course and not so practical for today's world, there is a lot of terms and subjects that you require a good background in statistics analysis to understand well. It is a shame that this take part of the specialization program.",1
16912,If you do not know R studio or R programming this course will be very difficult for you. The fact that they state you dont need to know this program and then require you to use it to complete tests is unacceptable. Week 2 test onward requires you to modify code or program code in order to get statistics required to answer the questions. Their helpful hints cause errors when used mainly because you must know the correct syntax or placement of the code to get the correct answer.I'm very disappointed in this class and probably will not pass because I do not have the time to figure out how to program in R.,1
16913,"Overall the videos related to the quizzes are to vague and un detailed, I more often than not feel lost.Also this should not be part of the interaction design specialisation, and just be a small part of another course.Not once have I needed R or statistic in my 7 year design career.",1
16914,Not recommended. Not clear why we need to use R and learn all this statistics. Not practical for use in UX design.,1
16916,Little to no use for me. Should not be included in the specialization... I didn't sign up for a data class...,1
16986,"Uninspiring teacher, repetitive material that could have been consolidated with month 2 altogether.Did most of my learning from the supplemental readings.",1
17018,Which practice?,1
17028,This course hardly has any new content and a lot of it is also repeat from previous courses.,1
17039,Absolutely useless course,1
17058,not worth the money.,1
17068,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
17085,"Very boring presentation of the material. I am sorry to say so, but the professor is not a very engaging speaker.",1
17097,Nothing practical,1
17129,Waste of money.....,1
17215,"I don't know how useful the ambiguous requirements exercise is when we only have one-way feedback. I also think that the ambiguous requirements exercise is the most important of the course, and the exercise missed the mark.I would suggest you structure that exercise as a dialogue, where a PM is working with the customer to elicit requirements, and not give us a big long wish-list of functionality. Structured as a dialogue, you can show that a PM would ask, ""You said that the game would make noise. When is the first time it makes noise? How often would game noises be made? Does it ever stop? What makes it stop? Why even have the game make noise in the first place? Are there different noises made during the course of game play/""So, I can't recommend this particular course, and I'm concerned about what the capstone will look like if you give us an assignment where we're to make sense of functionality delivered as a block of text .",1
17271,"This course totally reminds me of some courses back in college: unorganized material and the assignments are unrelated to the tutorial. The assignments themselves seem to be very helpful but the tutorials did no help of achieving these assignments.I had a hard time following the instructor despite that I've completed all the certificate for python from University of Michigan. I'm aware of my background of python is still not strong enough so I thought it's probably just me not able to learn it fast enough.But then I watched the tutorial about SQL. As a data architect / ETL developer, SQL is something I'm familiar with and use it everyday and then I realized that the instructor couldn't explain a nested query well. The reason I was able to understand about the SQL part is because I already know.",1
17277,"Outdated, unintelligibly exercises, terrible lectures.",1
17314,"Poorly designed videos, too long and confused",1
17318,Th first three classes are very 'thin' in content and the assignments are easy. The fourth class is basically optional and it has TONS of content. What's the point?,1
17341,"Lost in details. Professionals(btw I hold a MSc degree in Computer Engineering) cannot get anything from this. What is the point of writing frequency.pl where there is a hist() function in R? If the instructor is trying to teach us how to program in any language, then I can assure you the data science class is not the right place. I recommend the instructor check ESSEC Business School for analytics subject to better comprehend the Coursera and its goals.",1
17374,I suppose that we should have some basic knowledge of data visualization before this course. There are no practical sessions. I could not understand many topics and it seems that content has been missing from this course.,1
17392,Starting it now.,1
17396,"The course do not match its price at all, it is catastrofically sketchy. First time while using Coursera I am so much unsatisfied with some course.",1
17414,"Too dull, no programming explanations. Sometimes too simple and suddenly too technical.",1
17466,"The peer reviewed assignments are next to useless, as there is no oversight on them. I think there needs to be a basic comprehension assessment done first, before allowing fellow learners the ability to pass/fail students in the course.",1
17514,"Great material. Some things I didn't know about disabilities and colleges, however the presentation of the videos that were not of a guest speaker were poorly done. The instructors sounded like robots and you could tell easily that they were just reading from a script.",1
17518,"You have to pay to upload the assigments , this does not pas in other courses ...",1
17529,Quiz should be open to all students... :/,1
17559,Too theoretical.,1
17667,"Executive Summary: Do not spend time on this course if you have minimal common sense and have read at least one article on Data Science.I finished the 11 week course ""Machine Learning - Stanford University - by Andrew Ng"" 2 months ago, which was such a great course! It kept me busy for about 20 days (at about 4-6 hours per day) and I learned so much!This course ""A Crash Course in Data Science - Johns Hopkins University"" , Part of a 5-course series, the Executive Data Science Specialization, provided just some superficial obvious information, took me only 3 hours to complete and even this time I would could wasted time.Finally coursera now starts to make courses smaller and smaller and them adding multiple of them up to ""Specialization"", so that at the end you have to pay much more to get a certain amount of information and course time. With this course they seem to have streched it to a new extreme. The price for the certificate for this superficial short mini course has reached the same price ($ 44) as what I payed for the extensive great Machine Learning course from Stanford University by Andrew Ng !",1
17695,A little devoid of depth.,1
17728,"It's too short, I think it should be a part of a course and not a course itself.It is a repetition of concepts and examples from other courses by john hopkins univ.",1
17732,"This course is very sparse on details, and just a week of content. The lecturer is not the best at explaining concepts.",1
17759,"Very basic, for absolute beginners/ managers completely new to data (let alone data science)",1
17763,Too short to get any depth of information. Too expensive for the content provided.,1
17836,boring,1
17839,it's a shame to split a one month course to four.,1
17870,Only one week. Not much depth.,1
17905,"In my opinion, this course is a waste of time, it simply throws a bunch of links and terminology for you to google and research. The project is interesting but once again, you have to do tons of research and take up other courses to fill the gaps (might as well do the other courses instead of this one).I do not recommend this course or the specialization.",1
17908,NLP is a total different thing and should be a course by itself. I would prefer a a large scale machine learning capstone where we could make models and it would fit better to real life situation! Through all the courses I worked hard only to reach NLP capstone? this doesn't feel right! Please fix it!,1
17944,A poor end to a poor Coursera specializations.,1
17950,"I currently taking this capstone and I must unfortunately say that this is the most worst course in the whole specialization. Of course the topic NLP and word prediction is interesting, but the problem is, that this is a dead course. A couple of students in the forum strugeling with details, but there is NO Mentor, no Professor or other course staff and no SwiftKey engineer as announced in the Project Overview.So everything you have to figure out completely by yourself and this takes a lot of more time than the 4-9 hours. And also why should you pay for a course where you learn anyway only ba your own.Pick any intersting topic you would like to work on and invest the time in this instead of paying for this Capstone without any support form Coursera, JHU or SwiftKey.",1
17956,Coursera lost my thoughtful 2-star review so I am replacing it with this. I learned a lot through my own efforts and through the efforts of students who bothered to post in the forums. The one mentor disappeared half-way through the course.,1
17966,"None of the previous classes will prepare you for this one. This is not really a class, but rather a project on a topic NEVER covered in any of the previous classes in this specialization.",1
17998,too theoretical without enough practical quiz and assignment,1
18001,"A list of research papers to read further that's it. The course is too short to cover the subject so it covers nothing in the end.The programming assignment have no help, whatsoever it's ""do it"" any language. The 2 programming assignment doesn't have much to do with the course. We don't even talk about the algo to use to do it. It looks like coursera has asked the professor to add a programming assignment to the course and he had 3 minutes to choose what it could be.It shouldn't be advertised in coursera as it is.Ah, forgot to mention that no one replies to the forums,actually no one uses them.I think the subject is very interesting but this course gives a really bad advertising to Coursera, the university and the professor.It needs more work before it's deployed on the platform.I am going to try another Coursera course in the same kind of subject I hope it won't be the same.",1
18009,"As a developer I consider this a very poor course. It can be good for manager and business people to better understand what technologies are available these days, but that it. You can easily look at the syllabus, go to the wikipedia and read the pages on presented subject and you will get the same knowledge. There were no programming assignments, quizes and exams were not challenging at all and some questions were really confusing. I won't recommend it to anyone and it shouldn't be part of this specialization.",1
18017,the video is too long,1
18027,"It was really focused on high level concepts of different technologies, the level was really basic. No details have been served.",1
18235,Concentrated on image manipulation which would be ok if you wanted to build visual websites for a living. If you want to code anything like business applications (like I did) I wouldn't do this course.Because pixel manipulation wasn't something I was interested in (in the JavaScript section) at all I found the course really boring but it was too late to pull out.,1
18267,So many better options out there to learn to code. The videos on this course had me so confused that I eventually gave up and went to another website to learn what I was supposed to be learning here. Asked a question on the forum that another student was also having a problem and nobody answered me.Very very boring. Try somewhere else.,1
18322,This is a lie. I do everything. I complete week 2 and now i come back to watch videos about week 3 and i see that i dont do anything.Can you imagine ?Good job guyz.,1
18340,wow. the presentations are really boring! the Java script part is super confusing!,1
18344,"This course is very inconsistent when it comes to JavaScript. Instead of giving fundamentals of the language, course instructors prefer to give you a bunch of non-standard libraries and teach you a couple of randomly selected methods which could be applied to images. All core concepts such as data types, data structures are explained very sketchy. OOP paradigm isn;t explained at all. For example, they give you a line of code which goes something like:var x = new SimpleImage(""..."");no explanation of what SimpleImage is is given neither you are taught how exactly it works. Apparently, this course relies heavily on self-learning the lib docs given on their site.All together this leads you to simply monkey-coping lecture materials into code editor without even realising how it works and what it does. This course is at best serve observatory purpose to give student just a peek at what web development is like.This course could not be used as a solid foundation fow specialization.",1
18386,The teachers and instructors really should make better videos and stop giving peer edit assignment when people are picky and do not grade your assignment. The instructors should also give their contacts to let their students contact them when the discussion forums dont work,1
18399,This course is not relevant in the real world.,1
18402,"Week 1 and 2 were very useful. As a beginner, I learned a lot about HTML and CSS. Week 3 was a big leap to JavaScript, and the level of difficulty was the reason why I quit the course. Concepts are not well-explained, a lot of material for completing the tasks is missing. Please make JavaScript part simple for beginners.",1
18437,"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.",1
18459,The jump to javascript is too great for beginners. Fundamental concepts of programming severely need more time spent on but are in fact glossed over too quickly.,1
18479,"I learned eight lines of Java code in four weeks, and we never implemented any of it into a web application (viz, a script that actually runs in a live website). Read a book instead. It's cheaper, takes about the same amount of time, and you learn a lot more. I gave it a star because one was the minimum. It should be zero because it wasted my time.",1
18480,"Really poor course. Rather than starting from the basics, this course picks random information to work with. Week 1 was information anybody with a computer knows. Week 2 was really good. Week 3 and 4 were completely useless. Rather than starting from the basics they jump into picture manipulation and encoding. Don't take this class if you want to learn about coding.",1
18481,Poorly designed and explained. You do not really gain much knowledge from this course.I would not recommend my friends and basically others to take this course. There are far better courses out there for much cheaper prices.,1
18489,"This is NOT a beginner's course. There is not enough coverage of fundamental programming concepts, and too much playing around with complex application concepts such as Steganography. Simple image manipulation is a good way to teach programming concepts. Teaching bit arithmetic in a first programming course is NOT. Also, there are many errors in the videos that should be corrected. And finally, this course is advertised as requiring 3-5 hours per week. What a huge underestimate! I have been programming professionally since 1989. Other than week 1, every week requires closer to 8-10 hours at least. Stop advertising this as a beginning course, or restructure it such that it is more appropriate for beginners.",1
18490,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,1
18502,The JAVASCRIPT part of the course was to difficult for me I didn't understand enough. I would like to see more tutorial.,1
18517,"Tutors reading from a teleprompter comes across as robotic, lifeless and boring. We should be told before we do a piece of work that we can only submit it by upgrading, not afterwards!",1
18529,"This course, starting from week 3 in NOT for beginners at all. If you are truly new to programming you would understand nothing from the Java Script part of the course. A lot of people complain about the same issue during the course.",1
18532,Not really useful ~ I would like to email in a PDF file of comments,1
18536,I quit this course as it does not live up to the specialization which it begins. JavaScript is not Java. The course description should clearly state that JavaScript will be taught and that it will be used to draw boxes of different colors. I was extremely let down by this course.,1
18538,This is not for beginners at all.,1
18566,HTML and CSS is good. JS search for another course.,1
18576,"I wanted to learn more about programming, but instead I found myself tested on RGB combinations and building a website straight out of 1998. The course is scatter and although it claims to be for beginners, it covers programming concepts rather quickly. If i hadn't taken other programming classes, I would have been lost.",1
18577,"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.",1
18601,Not everything is explained well so very challenging for someone with no prior coding experience.,1
18604,No ancillary reading material or text to help along with the assignments lead me to fail the course.,1
18610,Last week was incredibly difficult.,1
18621,"The instructors rushed through the Javascript part. Unlike the previous sections, this section assumes that one knows Java and its syntax beforehand.",1
18626,Too much emphasis on taking tests versus actually programming.,1
18634,"I drop at the beginning of the Javascript, before Javascript, everything is good, after Javascript, ""What are they talking about""?",1
18639,"A giant and complete waste of time. $79, and 1 month of work and it's all Javascript, no java. Worse yet, you are required to work in BlueJ, (google it) with custom Javascript functions that you are not allowed to view or use outside the course. So, none of the code you write in this course will ever be able to be used anywhere else. (The functions probably are in a minified file, but the students were not given access to that file.) A complete waste of time. I would give it ZERO stars but can't submit this rating without giving it one star.",1
18642,"Definitely not a course for a beginners, very confusing. The part with the Javascript is a real horror for beginners and even challenging for some newly programmers!",1
18668,Very poorly structured. Explanation and examples were not very helpful. should revamp the course content and video lectures (specially the steganography part).,1
18685,"Honestly not a very well designed course. I went through the videos and tests for weeks 1 and 2 and found that it's just rushing us through the basics while not really telling us much. Much of it was ""here's an introduction to a tiny detail... You go find out the rest""..",1
18704,The course does not has lecture slides that is better for students to understand.,1
18705,"The big assignment at the end contains instructions that are outdated and incomplete. Given the length of the course, it feels like you already need to know the material before even taking it.",1
18710,"I was very upset by the end of this course. The documentation was terrible. I ended up spending way to much on AWS even though I managed it the best I could Terminating instances. In general, I think this course would have been more fulfilling if the documentation was appropriate.",1
18711,This course is really bad. The instruction is not enough to solve the programming assignment. The almost contents aren't related to communicating data science result.,1
18712,"I'll say the same about this class as the rest of the specialization, if you have the skills to complete this course then you don't need to take this course. If you don't have the skills to complete this course, you will not complete this course. The course instruction is at 10000 feet level and the assignments are very challenging and the course will NOT teach you the skills required to complete the assignments. The AWS final assignment is a very much throw you into the deep end with no real instruction (well at least completely outdated instructions) and will expect you to swim (or more likely for most people, to drown).I recommend the Machine Learning Course (from Bill's colleagues) at University of Washington. That is a course where you get some real instruction and understanding of how to complete assignments (though still very challenging).",1
18715,"This course is not maintained. It's flat out exploitative to throw students at an AWS assignment without updated instructions and with outdated versions of pig scripts, etc. They're setting students up to hemorrhage money on AWS and possibly not get anything out of it. Under no circumstances should you take this course or even this specialization so long as this assignment is gating it.",1
18716,Much of the assignment was out of date. The content was not related to big portion of the assignment. There was no way of getting clarification over the outdated assignment content.,1
18719,"The lectures are excellent, but do not take this course if you are not already proficient in a graphing package, whether it's R, python, or something else much more sophisticated than Excel. Otherwise you will be faced with the painfully frustrating task of learning a package while trying to complete an assignment, all with a short deadline.",1
18734,"1)the course is very abstract and is looks more like an obvious advertisement. Less than 10% contains useful information and the rest is describes the same idea ""Cloud is good"" with various words and phrases.2)buggy. And the worst thing is one of the last tasks contain a bug which doesn't allow you to pass this course. So you've completed all the tasks and in the end you find out that you just can't finish the course.3)The course is about ""Cloud"" as a technical term. Then why in the end you require to complete a task which is fully philosophical? And of course again - you have completed a course and in the end instead of finished course you will get this ""sucker punch"".Good luck to everyone who wants to try to pass this course because in my opinion it means a wasted time.",1
18740,"Week one starts with interesting material that relates probability to data science. Unfortunately as the course progress the course material and videos become less and less helpful. Ultimately the student has to visit other web sites and youtube to actual learn the expected material. The course notes are next to useless and the video are equally unhelpful. I am sure the teachers know their stuff but they have no idea on teaching it clearly based on the material presented in this course. Avoid this course, and head over to KhanAcedemy and complete their probability and statistics program and you will actually learn all the material in this course with a ton of examples and top class videos.",1
18772,"This course is very strong with respect to presenting the concepts you need to know for data science. It is extremely WEAK in terms explaining those concepts. If you are like me and did this kind of math back in the 70's and 80's but have not used it since, be prepared to seek sources outside Coursera in order to understand the material and pass the quizzes. The instructors leave out explanations and skip important points leaving you confused about the concept.Example: In the Permutations and Combinations sections, ""results"" of calculations are thrown at you with no explanation of how the instructor got the answer. 10 minutes later, totally as an aside, you get the explanation. The course is not taught in such a way that A leads to B, B leads to C, and C leads.....; instead the instructor will tell you about C, might explain A, and forget about mentioning B until the graded quiz. That is why you will need to fill in the gaps using websites like betterexplained.com or kahnacademy.com.The student is better served by looking at the syllabus and then going to either of those sites - where the explanations are worth your time.In addition to failing to present steps in a logical order, the course often teaches at an extremely basic level but tests at a much, much higher level. Again, to get to the higher level of understanding needed to pass ANY of the required, graded quizzes, the student will need to heavily utilize outside sources. The explanations on the practice quizzes also fail in many cases to thoroughly explain why an answer is correct.Then there are the issues with Coursera itself, the course navigation using Chrome is quite bad. If I did not constantly monitor what part of a course I should be in versus what part of the course automatically loaded next, I often found myself taking a quiz for which no lectures had been presented. The TA's response to my complaint was flippant and WRONG. She then closed my question and I could not respond or ask for more details.If I had it to do over again I would invest my time and money somewhere else. In my opinion, Coursera should rescind the instructors' rights to charge for this course until the instructors improve and meet higher teaching standards.",1
18781,"I've done quite a few online courses over the past few years, and I consider this is without doubt the poorest. The lectures do not comprehensively provide the information needed to complete the assignments. I think this is not just my opinion either as posts in the course forum suggest other participants have the same view. The stated module completion times are wildly optimistic. I only managed to complete the course by substantial independent research. Consequently, I would not recommend this course.",1
18794,"This course is a pure advertisement for IBM products. I entered the course expecting to learn about Raspberry pi and Python and got nothing our of it! If you are really looking to learn about IoT, check out a course called "" An introduction to programming IoT"" by University of California, Irvine. I am taking this course right now and already learning a ton! This course, on the other hand, is a total waste of time.",1
18843,"Hi, I am an IT specialist (30 years experience). I undertook the course so I could learn about IBM Bluemix and IoT development, and extend my skills/understanding of the environment. However, I have very little good to say about this course offering. I had numerous issues with what was offered:The videos were generally ok, but some had poor audio. There was minimal video (compared to any other course I have done), and more detail and discussion in videos would have been more helpful.Some of the video material is out of date already, as I suspect Bluemix layout has changed - this made navigation a bit confusing.The downloadable Pi image has changed since the course was prepared, and the newer image has different code as standard. I ended up having to muddle-through manually loading packages and dependencies, etc. to get things to work.I lost many hours trying to debug and rework assignment code, just to get it to work for the grader tool. This was further complicated by not having good debug output from the grader to work with. Naturally some of the grader fails were my own fault, but the majority of issues I ran in to could have been avoided by better worded assignments and/or more detail about requirements.Lastly, it was taking sometimes days to get any response to requests for guidance on the forums / discussions. In fact, I think the majority of useful assistance came from other students who had run in to the same issue(s). When you have a course that is such a short time frame, you really need to be providing assistance in a timely manner.I could not, in any good faith, recommend anyone take this course in the future - which is a little saddening. I do thank the lecturers for their efforts thus far, and sincerely hope they can either improve or drop this course offering in the future.",1
18845,The intro video just really put me off. sorry!,1
18854,The obstacle of not knowing French is quite detrimental,1
18857,I do not like the different language. I do not read fast enough to keep up and understand what is bing said. I think we should have a language button to translate to English or any other language that takes cources from Corsera.,1
18860,"Decent course content, but fairly basic. However, the peer graded evaluations are subjective and take too long to get feedback and progress in coursework. I will not be taking another course that uses this loose of a peer evaluation.",1
18900,"instructions for assignments are not clear! Lectures are good, but its practically impossible to get the certificate.",1
18910,"The videos for this course seemed to be 30% recap of the prior lesson, and 20% restatement of what was learned. Some even duplicated their own content in the restatement. The material covered was simply running through each of the menus in Tableau. Again, this material may be of use, but would be better as a primer for the class rather than presented as useful, paid content. Terribly disappointed.",1
18918,The content is essentially a subset of the information available in the free tutorials on Tableau's website. And a pretty small subset with that; the total length of the course is less than most of the MOOCs I have taken have for one week.,1
18930,"Hello,I've completed 5 modules of the specialization successfully with excellent grades. However, the biggest challenge and disappointment was the capstone. The case given is pertaining exclusively to the North American market. Students enrolling into the course are situated globally which makes it extremely challenging to gather data to understand and substantiate our work on the project. Several hours of extensive research yields no usable data which could provide a logical direction to the project. Reading material provided explains mainly the company profile, a few links are blocked due to geographical restrictions, reports that are available are to be purchased etc. While the money invested is not refundable now, however coursera with university team needs to seriously resolve this point. All learning done through the course remains largely a theoretical knowledge if a student isn't able to apply it in his/her job.",1
18931,This capstone is unavailable most part of the year. I paid in advance for the complete Digital Marketing Specialisation which is a 1 year subscription thinking I can complete the course anytime I want (that is how they advertise it). I finished all the theory well within the 2 months into my enrolment. When I came to the capstone project it was unavailable and for almost 3-4 months. When I contacted coursera.org they had no clue when it is going to start. I am a working professional and my schedule gets very busy when I am on projects. And ever since then whenever the capstone is available my schedule has been very busy. I have completed 2 Assignments in capstone and 4 to go and the 1 year subscription is over. Coursera.org says I have to pay for it again to continue which I am never willing to. There is no courtesy to a student/customer who has paid for the course. I have paid in full but I don't have the Digital Marketing Specialisation Certificate. This platform is more about money than education.,1
18940,"There is no doubt that coursera platform is the best education in the worldBut I want to learn digital marketing and this Capstone needs to experience in the digital marketing not less than 10 yearsI wish there are a path or templates to work and learn, such as the Capstone project of specialization in marketing social mediaThere is lack of information and data and the previous five courses is insufficient for professional project like this CapstoneThe first course marketing in the digital world was really the best course in courseraand This course is really the worst course in courseraAnd unhelpful and I did not learn anything from this course only gather information from various sources to pass assignment",1
18945,too long,1
18947,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
18951,"Capstone exercises were very ambiguous, the students were left to interpret they way they had to finish and how they rated their peers.The peer reviews were poor with little to no feedback and the focus was on how the material was laid out vs what the content was.I have done other coursers and capstones in Coursera this was one of the poorest. UIUC has to revamp this. More guidance to students in the instructions would be the first step.",1
19065,"Very bad course. No videos, just an interactive textbook. The course states all you need is ""high school level biology"" yet you require coding knowledge for the very first quiz. there are side questions on the first week like does this algorithm runs in O(k * l * x^2) or O(xllogk) without ANY explanation. I guess you can find much much better book about bioinformatics, and as this course is nothing more then a book i recommend a better one.",1
19074,"Unfortunately, as often happens, what is ""simple"" and basic for one is not that for another. This course presumes a comfortableness with coding that I simply do not possess as a teacher of high school science. Please try and develop a true introductory course that normal, non-programmers can access. Thanks!",1
19097,"I found the course content to be too simple, hence uninteresting.",1
19098,"Sadly, I found the presentation poor: not at all fluent, and under-prepared - sometimes what was said was different from what was written (which was correct), potentially causing confusion. Also, some results were given without justifying them, for instance the concept of simplest number was stated but not proper",1
19124,"I do not recommend this course if you want to be taught intuitively. The slides are mostly just a list of bullet points, with very few intuitive figures or charts (normally figures/charts are easier to understand and remember, even the simple ones). You are just fed with lots of concepts throughout the course. But in the end, you are suddenly required to do some practical C programming in Contiki (an embedded OS), which you need to spend some time to figure out quite a number of practical issues just for a successful run.",1
19125,I categorize this course in the beginner level not intermediate.,1
19129,Useless bla-bla-bla in general words. Nothing concrete. It is not possible to build embedded system with OS after finishing it. IoT is mentioned just for marketing and promotion. If you seriously consider developing OS-based embedded system even just reading Wiki pages about EOS would not be such a waste of time as listening to this course.,1
19186,"A jurassic park image, with material you can read by yourself?",1
19214,"After going through each lesson, week by week and thinking I was really learning something, but I can't pass the first exam (even with my notes and Google) and almost had a panic attack when I looked at the second exam.I feel like I wasted fifty dollars and hours of my life in order to get what little belief I had that I might have actually learned something come crashing down.",1
19231,"One way (approach) to 'teaching' data shows only that you know data but haven't designed multiple ways of teaching it. No, feedback from instructors, directly, makes it hard to obtain conceptual understandings. ie, as soon as you become lost with the one-way taught week, no way to grasp the following weeks. There could be a higher rate of success AND enjoyment of learning, if more thought were put into 'How to teach' the material. Been playing music for over 30 years and am failing from week 4 on. This shouldn't be as confusing as Coursera has made it. Disappointed and DISCOURAGED!",1
19256,"The course material itself is enjoyable, but the quizzes don't work properly. The feedback given to the same responses between retakes is contradictory.",1
19301,"Very low content: I got more information about Berklee than about music from this course. It is more of a show-off of the university than it is an actual informative course. Looks a lot like a yt tutorial, just much fancier because they are berklee. I watched from the beginning to the end waiting for them to start talking about anything other than naming intervals, but it didn't happen. They try to ear-train you, but any app for ear-training will do it better. Quite disappointing.",1
19391,The certificate doesn't show hours per week and the topics we did during the course. I paid for an empty paper.,1
19467,"I am very disappointed in this specilization/course. I am working as a business analyst in a data warehouse consulting firm, so I was highly motivated to take all the courses! However, lecturer's poor delivery has taked me aback! It is really hard to grasp the information when it has simply been read to you! The lecturer is always reading and it makes me sick (sorry!). Anyway, I would not continue with the courses if nothing changed. In my opinion, if the lecturer respects students and his field of study, he does not READ from the script and lack motivation...",1
19513,Quizes were poorly worded.,1
19532,The material is very unclear.,1
19616,Not very well put together. It marked some answers as wrong that were actually correct.,1
19635,"It was the worse experience I have so far on Coursera Platform; the course itself was sloppy and with nearly zero content. The instructors spent too much time telling you what you will learn and talking too slowly as if wanting to fill in the gaps than actually having some worthy material prepared for all the ""pupils"" out there, who gave their time, effort, and commitment. Pity really.",1
19650,doesn't show the videos.,1
19662,"This course requires that you already are a manager or are in a position very similar to a manager. More importantly, this course is filled with ""neuro-babble"". The fact that the hoax (by now debunked) of the ""positivity ratio"" and the ""attractors of happiness"" are still in the course and presented as fact is a big red flag. Not recommended.",1
19717,The instructor rambled on when back on forth on topics and numbers too much and made the videos much longer than they needed to be. Some of the information is badly outdated like the electric vehicle driving range and hybrid vehicles only able to drive a mile with ou,1
19727,The course material as presented appears to be at least four years old. History has proven many of Professor Shelton's conclusions to be wrong. Having Professor Shelton read his powerpoint slides is a very dull way to convey information. I expected more from Georgia Tech.,1
19742,"what in Stalin's name is ""tail that wags the dog""?",1
19746,Really not good. I am trying to find out how to un enroll,1
19750,Inaccuracies and low level of engagement.,1
19752,"Good if you want to fall asleep. The content is probably interesting, but they would have some use of advice from the entertaining industry.",1
19762,"I'm unimpressed with the quality of the material and uninspired by the professor's video presentations. Out of the dozen or more courses here that I have taken, this one ranks at the bottom. I'm not going to disenroll at this time, but I have lost interest without even progressing beyond the first week. Maybe if I get inspired later, I will try again.",1
19771,This is SO out of date that half of the information is irrelevant,1
19781,the tutorials are outdated. I could not install all the software needed to complete the course nor do I understand what they are used for... too bad. looks like a great course,1
19800,"The course material was interesting, but the TOTAL lack of support forces me to give it only one star. I left the following complaint in the general forum for this course 2 months ago. Neither Coursera, the instructor or any moderator ever responded. Many people were not able to run the software supplied in the course because of bugs, but the solution was left to the student. I have taken good courses on line before, but this is not one of them.It seems that the Dr. Tucker Balch and/or the moderators have totally abandoned this course, but Coursera keeps offering it and collecting money.The neither instructor or nor the moderators have posted on the Meet and Greet Forum.The instructor and/or moderators have ANSWERED NO QUESTIONS posted on ANY forum.The QSTK (software) BUGS have NOT BEEN ADDRESSED by the instructor or the moderators. Only students have answered these forum questions.""Computational Investing Part II is coming shortly."" That is what they said 3 years ago. Further evidence of abandonment.",1
19802,Terrible. Nobody seems to monitor the forum. No response to questions posted.I want to rate zero but there is no such option available.,1
19806,I think the course is really missing some key parts.,1
19813,I can't even access the site.,1
19817,"The code teacher used is out of maintenance, students have to spend a lot of unnecessary time fix it. Even I have purchase it and finished week 1-3, I still chose to drop out. Not great learning experience. :(",1
19839,"GOOD:topicsBAD:presentation (poor sound, unprepared and unrehearsed presentations, long intro's, unjustified use of greenscrenns, etc)shallow with regards to the theoretical aspects of what it is presentedassignments are mechanical (easier than the tutorial and you have to perform the same tasks for different constants for several times)",1
19840,Incorrect formulas. Very simplistic approach to subject matter,1
19955,"Too long, not enough concrete materials, too much focused on US.",1
20142,"The class recording could have been made simple. Lots of notations, and would definitely be difficult for people without prior econometrics background.",1
20168,"Old fashioned Econometrics course, still using the ideas of fixed regressors (rather than the more sensible conditional models approach), emphasizing prediction instead of causal interpretation, etc.",1
20176,Not much teaching going on here. The concepts are barely touched on before the student is asked to jump into training exercises that require lengthy proofs of concepts not thoroughly taught.,1
20179,"If I can understand all of these derivatives, why shall I attend your course? It is not helpful course, especially for persons looking for some practical econometrics applications rather than focusing on the mathematics side of it.",1
20211,"If you have to pay for the certificate itself, then the course can't be too serious or maybe even that much helpful.",1
20255,The course is very short and more advanced courses are not free.,1
20261,corporate HR focused conflict NON resolution.,1
20273,"Presentation is so boring and dry, I could not bring myself to watching past the first couple of videos.",1
20282,This is a joke right?5 minutes long videos with questions after it shall teach me effective?!you guys are ridiculous!,1
20293,Very boring. Not many real life advices. Mstly theory,1
20302,"The course material is interesting (3/5) but the assignments rely heavily on reviewing the work of other students which severely detracts from the course. If I wished to grade other people's coursework, I would have pursued a career in academia instead of becoming a research scientist.",1
20361,This feels more a like a sales pitch for Copyblogger than an actual course. Kinda feels like a waste of my time. I didn't learn anything new.,1
20530,"Few content, bad quality, many mistakes in the material, no programming assignments, poor support.Definitely not worth the money.",1
20606,"Videos and materials are fine, but insufficient for the quizzes, which are apparently very difficult even for PhDs in the field.",1
20712,boring,1
20757,"There is no real flow between videos and questions, not easy to follow. Good efford, good content, just wrong methodology for online training for 2015.",1
20791,boring and helpless,1
20795,no one would take this course any more.,1
20852,"boring lecturer, monotone, passionless reading of even more boring powerpoint slides and images, and absolutely no intelligent discussion going on in this course, I have learned more from reading the book ""the epigenetics revolution "" by nessa carey, a book written for laypersons, than I have from this course taught by university professors. don't waste your time",1
20959,very basic. for novices. not worth it to pay money for it,1
21202,NEEEEEED TO EDIT MY PEER REVIEW FROM OTHERS,1
21208,"When it comes down to it, there's simply not the support to assist a student that has a really hard problem, ""hacker mentality"" seems to equate to ""figure it out on your own cuz nobody's going to help you"". If things do not work perfectly for you then you are likely never to be able to finish because your ""peers"" don't know any better either. The way this class is set up makes me angry every time I have to deal with it. I would probably be just as well served doing just the swirl() exercises. I would quit if I hadn't paid all the way through in advance. I can't believe this is the type of school John Hopkins is to produce a course of this quality, but I guess I have to.",1
21254,This course mostly about how to use plotting libraries in R.,1
21290,Material is to basic for an entire course.,1
21336,"Not a fan of this course. Reasons:1) The subject material is presented in a dry manner (too much talking and jargon) - I find it repetitive and boring. I have to play it at least 1.75x in order to get through the material and try and stay engaged but I still have a hard time paying attention. Seriously, so boring!2) There is a high degree of subjectivity in grading essays (peer reviews)This course can benefit from:1) Clearer introduction of concepts using pictures and animations, as well as cutting out the repetitiveness (and the assault of the jargonaut)2) A better approach to grading that places importance on concepts instead of key words (jargon)",1
21401,Bad videos. Reading material should be summarised,1
21525,This is far too rudimentary to be something produced by a university,1
21650,very dissapointing to not be able to make the quizzes and the assigments without paying it,1
21717,Terrible englishQuite diffuse contentNo reading texts,1
21722,This is just blatant propaganda for the EU. It's like a big commercial. I'm surprised that Coursera allows this tripe on their website. Awful!,1
21724,Doesn't worth the effort. You learn the most by searching online tools each time you encounter a problem while solving a quiz problem or following the steps the instructor did.,1
21785,"For such a terrible course to then change payment terms without my authorisation. Take $64 from my account without telling me clearly amongst all the other junk mail. Coursera have a lot to answer for, and this specialisation is not even worth wasting your time if it was free.Taught without purpose; meaningless instructions given to copy without regard of the bigger picture.",1
21812,lectures are too fast.dropping out.,1
21850,"Basically impossible to complete quizzes and course project using the provided course material. Poor correlation between instruction and testing. Makes one wonder: If I need to solicit others' guidance to complete your tests, why am I paying for your guidance in the first place?",1
21858,"Lectures and other material just don't cover the information needed in the course project. Majority of the learning has to be done outside of this course, in order to pass the course project.I cannot recommend this course anyone who is not deeply familiar with the topic already. The course project is truly frustrating!",1
21897,Poorly constracted course!,1
21902,"R is really just the worst, and the instructors do not make it better. The code in this class is unreadable:- too many one liners, because ""it's faster to write"", though harder for other people to read- variables are named cryptic things like spIns or x, rather than names with meaning (eg, sprays.by.insect), again ""because it's faster to type""- way too many cases of ""there is more than one way to do it"", which just makes things confusing because the other ways tend not to be equivalentWhat I'm most concerned about is that I've seen lots of poorly written code in many different languages: Java, C++, C, Python, Perl, and now R. But I've also seen really well-written code in all the languages *but* R, I have yet to see any code in R that is flexible, maintainable, and clear. Which leads me to think that no such code exists, or it's so rare that it doesn't matter. It is clear to me that if I am to do data analysis, then I will need a different set of tools; but because this specialization is taught entirely around R (the lectures are about R, not about higher-level concepts), then this specialization is not useful to me.",1
21909,"There is a lot of fluff in this course and at the same time it assumes that you have knowledge and skills that are not covered in this course or in the previous two (e.g. github). I'm really disappointed in the quality of this course--specifically at how vague many of the instructions were in the quiz questions and the final project-- and that most the time when explanations were asked for on the message board the professors just did some hand waving and said that figuring it out was part of the assignment. That isn't teaching (online or otherwise). And if your instructions aren't clear, you aren't doing the job of an instructor when you pass the buck and try to sell it as ""part of the learning experience."" I hope this fall off in quality isn't reflective of the rest of the courses in the data spec.",1
21939,The worst! I don't recommend you to take any course from this institute. It is just wasting time and money.,1
21945,Description of assignment questions is not clear. The expected answer from the questions are confusing.,1
21987,"There are quite a few issues with the final assignment of the Getting and Cleaning Data course. I feel this assignments lacks quality in contents, suffers from a flawed process and lack of attention by the moderator.",1
22006,This is just because of the unclarity of the final assignment.,1
22079,It's useless and lacking enthusiasm.,1
22139,The theory explained and the exercises are not at the same level.,1
22240,This required nearly no effort and is probably of little value in the real world.,1
22267,Useful as a necessary step towards finishing the specialization only.,1
22268,"Total disappointment. This was only clipping through a tool, not a real capstone project.",1
22285,"Disappointing, thought it would be more involved, perhaps with a real presentation graded by other participants in the course. Was interesting to watch the videos, but it was a 10 minute job. The other parts were OK, but after the Capstone I would hesitate to recommend the course.",1
22286,"Thanks for creating short course for busy business pearson.But, it is too gamificate to (professional business managers) educate. In addition, this is the lack of contents.For improvement this course, I strongly recommend you to add create presentation and peer review assignments. This is the issue of the Coursera( included other MOOCs) Open Access Education philosophy.",1
22367,Very bad way of teaching and not reach content,1
22387,"Objective and Professional Evaluation:If I could give this course a zero, I would have done so, but it is not possible. I shall explain my reasons below:1- The teaching method of this course is very lackadaisical and lackluster.2- The ratios are introduced and solved without having a P/L statement or a Balance Sheet on the side to see how the figures are extracted and implemented, which made it more boring.3- Its final 3-part quiz lacks the proper instructions and the redundant instructions already there do not help either. For example, it says Part 3 is answering NPV. However, Part 3 includes six calculation questions unrelated to the project to be submitted in Parts 1 and 2.4- The forms of putting an answer are unclear, although it mentions how to put a percentage and two decimal points.5- Peer assessment take ages and is unnecessary.6- Discussion forums are deserted islands where no professional staff interaction is given.I've stopped continuing this specialization and I strongly recommend others not to waste their time on it.",1
22505,Badly formulated alternatives in the multiple choice test,1
22573,Not at all what I expeted,1
22585,"Answers to week 2 are wrong, no forum to discuss it, submitted a case over a month ago - still no reply.",1
22586,"There's no way to get help in this course. I'm stuck on one of the quizzes -- probably just something easy that I've mis-read-- but there's no way to ask questions, so there's no way for me to complete the quiz. This is very frustrating!",1
22621,"I didn't think it was possible to dislike finance more after taking a course designed for non-financial professionals. Clearly, I should have known more about finances before taking this class, and perhaps I would have liked it more. However, I left the course feeling more frustrated than ever.",1
22795,For me it was boring and too specific. I had a great difficult in understanding it....I quitted before ending.,1
22857,Superficial and not well presented.,1
22896,This course and material does not articulate the 'Google Cloud Platform' offerings. Maybe Google does not want to compete with Microsoft Azure and AWS alike. If Google itself has approved this 'Google Cloud Platform' trainings on Coursera then vola I am out. I am way better off supporting AWS and Azure (at least they have tons of good trainings and stuff to keep folks in the field excited).,1
22900,The labs in this course have fundamental flaws which mean they cannot be completed. This is a major failing in a paid course such as this.,1
22950,"Not being allowed to submit quizzes without paying for the course - I am withdrawing from the course and any other Coursera courses where this is the policy - I will enrol in other free online course sites where the are ""free"".",1
22952,"The only option I had was to watch videos, I could not submit quizzes, which I completed, unless I paid.What's even the point of having this course as part of Coursera?Very disappointed. Shame on the University of Maryland, College Park. Will stay away from this school.",1
23102,This course should really be called BASICS of healthy cooking or for people with unhealthy habits. It is very basic! And very based on the US reality! Living in Europe and used to cooking healthy food for my family everyday I have not learned anything new! Very disappointing to see such a basic course being offered by big names as Stanford University.,1
23183,I was expecting much more from a Stanford or Coursera course. Lack of scientific evidence .Processed foods have become an easy villain among many people and the idea that processed foods are dangerous to our health and the responsible for all our problems is a mistake. Very disappointing.,1
23222,"Well, this course definetely has a clear message and a good purpose. However, it is very basic and coursera might not the right platform.",1
23231,This has ruined my life.,1
23343,"I am disappointed, from a place like Stanford I was expecting a real course in nutrition.This course doesn't teach anything. It's a mere half an hour a week of advice we should all already know, if we are interested in nutrition.I am quitting this course, unfortunately it's a waste of time.",1
23516,Typically aimed at the US lifestyle,1
23580,"Not about the actual effect of food on your health, it's just a cookbook.",1
23590,"Utterly disappointing. I hoped for a fact-based education on current scientific thinking in nutrition. Instead, this course consists of a couple of people's opinions on eating, without cited evidence, presented in a feel-good documentary-lite format with good camerawork and cute children. This is a high school public service announcement, not a university course; not what I'd expect from Stanford or Coursera.",1
23618,"It is very basic and the principles are for a third-grader. After all the things said, at the end the first video was about pancakes (nvm they were gluten free)",1
23754,This is not a course - this is a 90 minutes lecture.The idea is greate. But this lecture is only start. Its very brief and not profound.This more advices and not scientifically oriented.,1
23867,"Hi,I was looking for a good introduction course to food and nutrition and, alas, this is not it.I knew 90% of the things discussed in this course, and I was expecting more, but all I got was very basic advices (""eat less"", ""don't eat crap"", etc.), all with videoclips and music which got annoying really quick.Disappointing.Take care.",1
23869,"Most of the information in this course is common sense. It may be relevant for someone with very limited knowledge about food, but for anyone who is moderately informed and interested in food, there is not much to learn here.",1
23919,"The final assignment is impossible to finish since I have 10.4 version in my computer. You, as the course provider, should modify the assignment instead of asking the student to make changes. The point is that we are trying to gain some knowledge, not wasting time on solving those bugs.",1
23980,"I am very unhappy about the Course Certificate for the following reasons : it doesn't state what subjects have been covered, it doesn't mention the hours of study involved. The certificate has a worthless appearance. In comparison I had a very good MOOC Statement of Accomplishment from the university EPFL which I can send to you if you are interested in making any improvements. jack.fairgrieve@gmail.com",1
24000,"This course is extremely hard to follow, not because of the content but because of the delivery. Presentation, ""visuals"", word choice, speed, all very poor. I'm in week 3 and EVERY video has been just as difficult to follow.Quizzes are hard to understand and ask you about things that weren't of any actual value to the course, and/or weren't even covered. Also, because multiple answers are required for each question, you are basically answering a 4 part question that is only worth 1 point. Get one part wrong and you miss the whole 1 point.",1
24008,"AWFUL monotonous way of talking. I have such a great interest in this topic, but listening to her makes me want to rip my eyeballs out.",1
24042,The educator is really wants to be boring. The questions doesn't reflect the material. Why am I learning so much about a dog or who is whose relative in a bioelectricity course?,1
24091,exam questions are designed for raw facts instead of critical thinking and resoning. Sorry maybe its my poor english. Regards.,1
24139,"I really like the lectures of this course. But on the other hand this programming assignments are...I am not able to see why using such a complicated main code template is useful to understand the principals of the finite element method. I spend 5 hours for trying to install all the libraries and finding the correct header files of deal.II and this visualization thing which is needed in the write_output.h file). Because otherwise you will not be able to compile the code. This is not the first time I did installation of complicated code in unix and I know by heart this can be cumbersome sometimes.But why doing this for a simple programming assignment. I started this course because I want to learn about finite element method and not how to install deal.II software. But exactly installing is what the first assignment is about it is not about coding what will be only a small fraction of the whole assignment then.And the next thing is there is not only one person facing this troubles there are quite a lot if you look in the discussion forums.On the other hand if there would be sufficient help given for the installation it would be fine, but it is not.The only help which is given are sending some links which is nice. But links I can also watch by myself.So I really liked this course and found it interesting ( or I still find it interesting ), but I don't see what learn effect I should have from messing around with those deal.II libraries.",1
24145,Very weak presentation. Must be improved to keep attention.,1
24152,"Poorly organized course. The lectures seemed to jump around from one point to another. In some cases, way too much detail; in others, not nearly enough.The subtitles have so many errors that they are virtually useless.",1
24155,"Difficult to understand due to her very strong accent and poor audio, meaning I spend 90% of my effort trying to make out what she's saying. As it turns out, all she does is read from the slides! no additional insight, nothing. This makes it boring to hear and she comes across with no personality (although a quick rate-my-professors search tells us a very different story, a real shame since people seem to really like her). At any rate after one week of this course and not seeing any improvement, I've decided to call it quits.",1
24185,Poor English. Unfair assignments ((,1
24187,Only catered to the American healthcare system. This course was not mind numbingly boring as hell,1
24188,"lecturer is very monotone and isn't engaging. Course also focuses a lot on the history when it would be more relevant to look to the future. It is peer graded which is extremely unreasonable, people do not read the submissions fully or fully have the knowledge to be able to grade someone else's work. People also have different standard which causes a large variation in grades. Grading rubric does not include areas for where extra research has been done either",1
24190,Unclear assignments unfit for an international participant base.,1
24198,"the quality of the lecture is poor - slides are dense and full of bullet points which the professor LITERALLY JUST READS OUT on videos. I did a google search, and found almost all of the analytical charts he presented, readily available on the internet. What exactly is the point in the lecture then? Instead, why don't you compress some valuable learning nuggets into half the course time, instead of hearing you ready through your ocean of bullet points, and needlessly underline (in red) the current bullet point your reading. Seriously, this is one the poorest quality lectures I've ever done!The quality of peer assignments to grade are a joke. Classmates are simply copying bits and pieces of the lecture material to make up the 'market sizing memo'.I seriously doubt the learning value in this class, and the quality of instruction.",1
24203,"Unclear, ambiguous direction and material that is unhelpful for building the final project",1
24211,I have submitted all my solution long back but the last submission which was suppose to been by mentor is pending from one and the half months.,1
24276,"As a person who actually studied physics and knows a little about data science, I am literally baffled the way information presented and lectures speak. Really don't recommend this cource at all. because Week 1 materals is a imcomprehenisble mess full of incorrect explanation and vague definitions.",1
24288,"It was not a great course. I found it not very rewarding, because the discussions were hard to follow. Also, it did not present historical literature and research on the subject. I was hoping for peer-reviewed articles and readings that helped illuminate the history and the psychology of education.",1
24304,From the start it seemed politically correct and ideological. Did not even broach the topic until the final week (as far as I can see from the list of videos). Life is too short.,1
24348,"The only reason i passed was because i ignored the lectures and asked others for help, once i did that finance became a lot easier to understand.",1
24367,It's terrible if one wants to accomplish the quiz using Garud Iyengar's Notes!! Examples in his notes were not well explained!!,1
24368,I think that the simply reading slides doesn't help people understand. The idea is to make this courses as accessible as possible.,1
24375,"I think the way it is taught is not very insightful, the lecturers clearly just read a script and make it difficult to follow. They assignment questions are often hard to understand. Most importantly, there is very little about the actual mechanism behind pricing financial instruments, instead they just state the formula.",1
24395,Not at all what I expected--big disappointment,1
24410,"It is not a recommended course, when they explain something they assume that we are expert and we know all what they are talking about, they need to have statistics experts which is not mentioned in course prerequisite.================I recommend to review the material and to review the purpose of this course",1
24427,It is a little sad that the materials taught were not matching test materials well in the quiz.,1
24429,Examples have to be more clear. i cant seem to get anything correct because of computers,1
24445,This course is conducted mostly more or less by reading just the slides.,1
24462,Extraordinarily dry presentation. It was a struggle to sit through each video.,1
24464,"The content of the course looked promising. But then I took a first look: the instructor is reading formulas from a slide. This is missing the whole point of a online class. There is no motivation for the formulars, no context why they are important. And from a learning point of view the course is very hard to follow. No real advantage compared to reading a book on that matter.I just took the ""Economics of Money and Banking course"", which is one of the best courses I ever attended (personally in class or online). There are other great courses on Coursera. And for easy introduction to some of the concepts Khan University courses are unmatched in accessability.Too bad that this course doesn't match up to the above examples. The topics would deserve that they are presented in a way that they can be understood by a wide audience.",1
24472,What a shame. English subtitles were promised and not arranged. I truly wanted to learn this course. Obviously Coursera doesn't care.,1
24473,Lectures are in Hebrew. English subtitles are in Hebrew also. Completely useless unless you understand Hebrew. I am about to drop this class.,1
24480,"Disappointing. Just brushed the surface of most of the topics, felt a bit too much like an ad for PWC or story telling about client engagements. Content was lacking",1
24481,"very little useful information, more like PR for PWC",1
24482,Basically this course was an excellent promotion of PwC as a consultant. A well crafted introduction of buzz-words with very little substance (Unlike the following courses on Excel and presentations),1
24493,Peer Reviewed Assignment not a well planned marking system. Grades can be to vary. Dependent on fellow students for pass not most ideal.,1
24497,very boring lectures. expected a lot more from something like PWC. Doesn't worth it at all. Didn't learn anything new.,1
24572,The reason why I am giving only one star that the course did not covered much information and the time allotted could have been less than 4 weeks. So it was not really worth the money.,1
24877,"Not adapted to an online format. Low quality videos.Interesting topics, but no efficient progression. Many sections become an update about UCSD research, not adapted to the audience.",1
24890,Have to say: this course is not useful,1
24892,I felt the course went far too fast and is definitely NOT a course for beginners. I gave up after the 2nd week and I now feel more than ever overwhelmed by setting my own website.,1
24897,Worst course on coursera.,1
24899,"This course does not live up to the high value that I've come to enjoy and expect at Coursera. The videos are read by the ""teachers"", so the inflections are wrong, making it very hard to follow. The videos are clipped short and cut off the words at the end. The information is given so quickly with terms not explained that a novice will likely not understand parts of it. I found no value here. There are far better tutorials on the web. I can't see how any college or university would respect any certificate from this course.",1
24900,makes it very confusing. I was looking to make a business websites.,1
24901,"The course is very disappointing and useless. The two lecturers are not explaining anything properly, they are just showing slides and handing out links.The only useful part of the course is Module 4, which is outside the scope of the course and taught by guest lecturers.I would not spend time on this course and instead find another source for learning WordPress.",1
24906,"If you have any experience with websites, this course is not for you: it is merely about the soft stuff. Got a couple of nice links to color scheme generator et cetera, but did not deliver what I thought it promised.",1
24910,"The sequence of the learning movie are not good and some times while teaching the the movie is ended.Besides, rather than educational material this course refer to several website.",1
24911,"Very horrible and boring course, poorly designed and the teachers can't even speak properly.",1
24914,They jump around too much and it is very hard to follow. Often I feel like I missed out on content.,1
24915,"I thought you would learn how to actually create a website, not just how to pick and install a premade wordpress theme.",1
24917,Nothing good in this course,1
24918,"I'm sorry to say this is a poor course. The audio is bad, the sound editing is bad, the ""videos"" are mainly static slides that sometimes aren't even showing what the audio is talking about. There are no worked examples or annotated slides. As an example, there's no discussion of the difference between WordPress.org and WordPress.com. The only time that is mentioned is when they touch on plugins, where they say you can't use them if you started with WordPress.com! The additional lectures by guest website designers were the most interesting part, but they were supposed to be after the final project. I just gave up after less than an hour and went and played with WordPress myself. Created a website in 2 days, but with no help from this course.",1
24919,"Despite all the bad reviews this course got I told myself to give it a try to refresh my antic prior knowledge and since it is for my personal usage and not a career I m not interested in a certificate. So I went through all the open sites which were extremely disappointing. Since I was warned by the reviews, I was not even tempted to pay to unlock further pages. I attended many interesting courses on Coursera, but this one is simply a waste of time from the very first moment.",1
24920,No content for the first two weeks. Only links to websites.,1
24922,"If I could give this course a lower score, I would. It was not helpful at all. I ended up having to take another course so I could actually complete my website.",1
24924,"This was the most poorly designed course that I have ever encountered. Whoever is in control of quality assurance was caught napping on this one - the instructors were woeful! It was as if the principles of instructional design and adult learning were abandoned entirely; there was minimal instruction and I had to rely on my intuition and the assistance of a study buddy to work hard to complete the course. If you are completely new to website design (as I was), prepare for a steep learning curve as you will be spending many hours preparing and organising your info - the title is deceptive and misleading!Ann, Melbourne, Australia April 2016.",1
24926,cheap !!! just money involved in each subsectionswhich r the most interesting parts,1
24930,"This is a bait and switch. You must purchase the course even though parts are free, it's really not.",1
24933,No use at all,1
24934,"This course should be called ""Intro to fundamentals of website design"". You may learn, in the process of a few days, how to create a website, but not ""how to create a website in a weekend"".",1
24935,The most boring course ever. I just couldn't go beyond the first day,1
24939,I was very disappointed because in order for me to move to the next module I have to pay to unlock some of the course materials. Coursera is changing. I understand that in order to maintain such a big structure is expensive; however it wasn't clear to me from the beginning that I have to pay to unlock the 2nd module courses.,1
24941,"Sorry to say that this is the worst Coursera Course I have ever taken, and I've taken quite a few. The instructors did not do a good job at explaining how to use Wordpress. They didn't explain how to use wordpress to make a website that looked more like a website than a blog. They didn't explain the difference between wordpress.com and wordpress.org even though they mentioned them both. They talked about hosting but didn't explain how to do it. They mentioned hosting on bluehost but didn't give any instructions. The few tidbits of information that they did give about using wordpress were so brief with no examples. They mentioned Jetpack but didn't say what it was. They didn't explain what benefit adding the social media icons would have or how to link them. And on I could go.The only good part about this course was the last section where they had guest lecturers, some from Coursera - those were all excellent.",1
24944,"I can't believe this course is aimed at people with no experience in building a website. The videos are actually slide shows and use too few screenshots. Had this been my very first introduction to how a website was built I would never have progressed any further than these lessons. Much more in-depth information is necessary, including step by step screenshots of various processes.Terrible course.",1
25043,"Feels like a money grabber rather than teaching anything useful, when designing character for video games is also important the skill you have or obtain while doing it and this doesn't place any emphasis into it. So for the price the charge in the certificate it really feels like a money grabber rather than teaching anything useful at all. Other schools like Gnomon WorkShop and DVDs like ""Eat3D"" and many others out there, which gives e more content for a fraction of the price they charging here! It needs to be deeper and more robust if this course wants to stand out, right now is not.",1
25082,"Awful course. The lectures IN NO WAY prepare you for the final assignment which is supposed to take two hours. The ""course"" consists of really boring videos of the instructor using Galaxy and in no way teaches you anything about using Galaxy or how it works. The lectures and quizzes are a joke. You can pass the quizzes just by watching the videos. I got to the final assignment and had no clue what to do if you. I know nothing about bioinformatics, or NGS (which is why I took and paid for this stupid course) so I spent WEEKS on the final assignment and I STILL could not finish or pass the course. Whoever allows this course to still exist and waste people's time and take their money should be ASHAMED of themselves. Read the discussion forums and you'll see what I'm talking abut. DO NOT TAKE THIS COURSE.",1
25086,This course is really bad. I didnt understood anything until by myself and with tutorials I could do it.,1
25088,"Very bad explanations. You don't understand anything about what you're doing, just pressing buttons. THis should maybe go after the command line course, so that at least you would have any idea of what you're doing.",1
25089,Very poor presentation and content. Difficult to navigate and all the links used including that for Galaxy are outdated. There was no effort made to provide a method to get through the course given all the changes since the videos were recorded. This course is the reason I have decided not to pursue the specialization it falls under.,1
25095,"Save your money and just work through the free Galaxy 101 tutorials on the Galaxy site! I found that the lecturers sometimes used random terminology without ever explaining it (for example, ""tags"" is another word for sequencing reads, but this is only ever used in RNA-seq methodology, and then only rarely). Also, the final peer reviewed project isn't explained very well and uses tools and methods that aren't even within the scope of the module. Mostly just a waste of time.",1
25096,"The material/information required for the capstone was not covered in the lectures and required considerable additional time and effort to find via online forums and the galaxy pages themselves. A manual of code examples and types of jobs would have been great. Further a better use of time would be to start doing the capstone on day 1 and do all of the lectures and quizzes later as the quizzes were very easy and anecdotal, but the capstone required more time then scheduled in the course.",1
25103,This course doesn't teach much beyond how to use Galaxy tools.,1
25104,"I suggest to do this course ONLY if you're doing whole specialization.Course is simply bad, teacher doesn't give to much information and project is very hard to finish.",1
25107,"This course is supposed to be part of specialization. Unfortunately this is a second course, and the first part doesn't provide necessary information on what we actually do with Galaxy. It felt like following instructions to push certain buttons.I would only recommend it to knowledgeable people with certain background, that should be listed as a REQUIRED knowledge. I hardly learned anything, except for that there is something called Galaxy, we do some analysis by pushing buttons, using preconfigured tools. I don't have expertise to analyse data on my own... unfortunately.As I applied for a financial help here, I won't complain much :).",1
25109,"This class presents very elementary information in the video lectures, then it requires knowledge far beyond what is taught in the course to finish the final project.",1
25111,"Course assignment requires knowledge that is not discussed in the course. Various inconsistencies throughout the course. Week 4's material is not really helpful and I had a feeling that the instructior just wanted to ""wrap up"" the course and didn't really care if the material is appropriate. Poorly written quizzes.",1
25113,"First, the instructor assumes that the students know so much background knowledge when the students are expecting to learn these stuff in the course. I also feel that this course teaches students to memorize steps needed to accomplish certain operations in Galaxy without explaining why it occurs.",1
25119,"This course did not make any effort until I had to dig deep into biology by myself. The course content is insufficient. I think if a sample input was used and every field of the input were explained and also the outputs were explained then it would make much more sense. Poorly designed and demonstrated. Thankfully I started the last assignment very quickly, it took me 10 days to understand how to proceed with the assignment. The TA is excellent, without his help I wouldn't pass this course.",1
25120,"This course's content is useful but honestly the final project is ridiculous because it is peer reviewed and the project is not very straightforward. Everyone gets different answers and without an answer key, no one knows what is right and wrong making it is almost impossible to pass. This needs to change.",1
25122,Course Project is way outside of what was taught in class.,1
25124,"Good introduction to the galaxy tool. However, the final project was too difficult for what was given in the lectures. I spent 97% of the time I spent on the course doing only the final project. It was too difficult and unfair. I think a way to improve the final project might be to make easier a little bit and give exclusive lectures to help students to do the final project.",1
25125,"The cloud computing service with amazon described in the course is not free anymore. I was charged money for using it. The course also took much more time to complete than I wanted to spend. I believe a better design of the project could lead to a more efficient, less frustrating learning experience. Details below.The usegalaxy server was extremely slow. As shown in the course, I installed an instance of galaxy in the AWS/Amazon Cloud. I was under the impression that this was a free service for the first year. Amazon has changed its interfaces and I could not do the installation as recommended. But I managed to run a few analyses with some workarounds. I did not explicitely terminated the galaxy instance for ~ 6 days. Charges of $280 accumulated.The course project in week 4 was far beyond what was covered in the lectures. It took me a whole week, spending multiple hours every day. Many dead-end roads coupled with extremely long run times on the galaxy servers resulted in very inefficient learning and many frustrations. Help via the discussion forum was critical to design an analysis pipeline - so thank you Dejan and all contributors for the support.This is not a course I could easily do part-time: I don’t have time to read the fine print on what is available for free on Amazon, nor do I have time to go through all of the tools on galaxy to find out what would be the best for my analysis.On the positive side: I think Galaxy is a great tool.",1
25132,"This course was very disappointing and much of the content in the tests and course did not show up in the course project. I felt like the course project was far more advanced than all the other detail. In addition, there was minimal to NO detail on instruction. VERY poor development here and I would not recommend it to anyone. All you need to do is look at all the threads of complaints. I am looking forward to the next Python course and h",1
25133,It gives a quick background on Galaxy and its softwares. Content is appropriate but does not prepare you for even the final assignment or real genomic problems.,1
25135,"Quite confused during the majority of this course, especially after how clear the first course was. Was able to follow instructions but did not fully understand why I was doing anything. Not enough foundation given. The final project came out of no where. We did not learn nearly enough in the course to be able to tackle that. The majority of steps that needed to be taken were not taught in class or if they were, they were glossed over. I was floored by how the class went form simple to extremely complicated with no transition phase.",1
25160,We are expected to complete a quiz for which we can submit responses only when we purchase the course. What Bullshit!!,1
25191,Course is very high level and teacher inspiring. As I highlighted already it took me 8 hours with a professional to install Pentaho... for what? to explain pivot tables totals. that is very unecessary. Also from Europe virtual machine use is just killing my computer and I end up spending more time crashing and restarting my pc than working on the course. (and I am surrounded by IT professionals in my company for reference). This is sadly a big let down for an excellent course theory wise.,1
25222,"Awful. Just awful. There are dozens of students trying to install Pentaho and failing. Only reason I managed is that I have prior experience with the software. There are no TAs, no help, nothing. The Quiz is a scam designed to force you to shell out even more money of the so-called-optional textbook, and the assignments are extremely vague and orders of magnitude beyond the laughable 30 minutes the instructor suggested they should take. My submissions for week 3 total over 30 pages -- and I work a full time job... Avoid this class, do not reward terrible courses with your cash.",1
25372,"This is a course almost without any content. You coul pick any book about game design and you will learn more of game design in the first ten pages. I recommend Level up! by Scott Rogers for begginers like me. You could be fooled by this course if you dont know the principles of design and narrative structure, but if you know it you will not find anything of value here, becouse dont explain almost anything about videogame concepts like gameplay, balace, GAME DESIGN, etc. They explain very basics things in the first course and then they forget everything. The rest of the information are very very basic knowledge about character and world design, without being vinculated through metodologies to the games!, only with empty words of inspiration recorded in useles videos. Sorry the critics, but i followed all the courses and paid the monoey for the certificate, hoping that some week the course could show somethign usefull. Never did. See for books if you want to learn something.",1
25381,Hopeless ! Less clear and understandable than simply reading a textbook.A waste of time.,1
25435,I think that is a poor course; a lot of much theory and little practice; is better read a book and see youtube. It doesn't meet my expectations.,1
25446,"Simple & Clear , Handsome teacher!",1
25450,"This course wasn't good. Many of the assignment instructions and questions were poorly written, and students clearly had trouble understanding what was asked of them. The assignments also weren't very deep or imaginative, and some of them requested very specific answers relying in keywords from the lectures rather than ensuring that the students had really understood the concepts. The design principles were introduced at such a surface level as to be just silly rather than useful. This was kind of a waste of my time.",1
25454,"Interesting topic, however I quitted. Video lectures were recorded almost phrase by phrase, making it too hard to follow the contents properly",1
25483,"The quiz feedbacks are empty, this is not good.",1
25492,"Hard to follow, ideas are not organized and are not well presented. Lecturer has many pauses, that even on increased playback speed (x1.25), are still distracting. Do not recommend!",1
25512,Don`t put your irrelevant politics in games,1
25520,"That person should not teach. Nobody. The person is not able to construct a sentence without denial and course has really little information, but lots of empty talking.",1
25556,"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.",1
25598,"Not very informative content, some parts are interesting but not worth the money.The worst thing is, all assignments are writting work that are evaluated by colleagues, meaning, it is purely objective, to the extent that one question asks if my uploaded file is in a readable format, example pdf, txt...etc and two out of three marking my pdf file as not!!! and not even leaving a comment why they are giving that bad score on obvious things!",1
25620,"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.",1
25622,"I didn't like the class despite getting 100% on pretty much every assignment. I learned very little from the class. I don't think 99% of what was in the class was useful to me at all. The grading for the class had ludonarrative dissonance with the quizzes. The projects were graded by peers, but the rubric was nonsensical. 1-5 scale for submitting a PDF, for example. So, someone might give you a 1 for submitting the PDF and thus you wouldn't get a full-score. It was just idiotic.",1
25698,You cannot even complete the first quiz before they demand your :P,1
25713,No allow to submit quiz,1
25743,Hands-on instructions and a very practical knowledge. Thanks!,1
25861,Teacher is boring. just learned programming from kahn academy and the teacher was excited to teach. this guy though.....PUT A LITTLE EFFORT IN!,1
26084,followed instructions to download twice waste of time both times still kept getting an error never got past this to continue with the course so didn't learn anything other than there is little support out there to resolve the problem i think because the course is not monitored or if it is well then more fool me! it would have been a good opportunity to explore this had it been possible to download Unity oh well those who can do those who can't resume their day to day life packing boxes.,1
26213,This course and material does not articulate the 'Google Cloud Platform' offerings. Maybe Google does not want to compete with Microsoft Azure and AWS alike. If Google itself has approved this 'Google Cloud Platform' trainings on Coursera then vola I am out. I am way better off supporting AWS and Azure (at least they have tons of good trainings and stuff to keep folks in the field excited).,1
26235,Translation from English only on the first slides. I thought it at all lectures. Spent a lot of time beginning to study.,1
26273,"If you don't want to actually learn what anything means and just get walked through steps on how to do things then take this course. But if you're a beginner to HTML, CSS, and Java Script, this isn't for you. He doesn't actually TEACH you anything, he just takes you through the process. They haven't updated the course content to actually match what is on GitHub's page, so from the start you have to go into the FAQs to figure out where to go from there. It's really frustrating because he will just skip steps, and because he doesn't explain WHY he's doing something, if you miss a step, you get completely lost. I've taken a few coursera courses, and this was the most frustrating course I have taken.",1
26551,"This course is actual for Mac machine, all instruction are for Mac only. I use Windows so it unuseful for me.",1
26586,I found there was too much information given in the course lectures without enough practice to learn bit by bit to really understand what I was learning.,1
26722,"doesn't have to be that complicated with command prompt actions from the beginning of the course, that make the motivation drop very fast.",1
27146,"I didnt like this course. I found it to be confusing. Compared to other CSS JS HTML Courses such as the one from Michigan or Hong Kong Universities which are quite clear and crispt and refreshing, this seems like a work in progress. Confusing, convoluted, odd.HTML CSS JS Are Actually not very difficult.This course makes u question your own name. Makes you think basic math is Calculus. It needs work. Lots and Lots of work. I cant recommend it to anyone who is serious about learning JS HTML or CSS. It accomplishes the exact opposite.With regards to that Chinese Restaurant field trip. What the hell man? Is this a joke? Have the lady call 1800 Web . Com and have a cookie cutter just add water web site. This segment is silly.The rest of the segments? Confusing.",1
27239,There is too much talk about climate change.,1
27327,"This course was extremely time consuming because a great deal of effort was required to translate it into something I could use. I had a great deal of trouble with following the lecture videos. The demonstrations of the tools were typed on a screen that was too small and the command line tools were executed so quickly that it's hard to see where the screen full of data came from. The lecturer had such poor pronunciation that lectures' transcripts show that the voice recognition software could not understand and transcribe a lot of her words. For example, ""command"" sounded like ""comment"" and likewise was transcribed that way. More seriously, it was hard to hear the difference between ""VCF"" and ""BCF"".",1
27331,"This is the worst course I've ever listened, and I've listened my fair share of online courses! Do this course ONLY if you want to complete whole specialization!Professor is simply awful, English is not her native language obviously, but even that is not the problem, she simply speaks sentences that doesn't make sense at all! And she obviously doesn't have computer science background, if she does then she is even worse then I thought.",1
27344,"The worst course I've ever take in Coursera. I can pass the course all because I have some background of this topic. The lecture taught me NOTHING!Consider I just finish the previous course ""algorithm for DNA sequencing"" which might be the best course I toke in the Coursera, this course makes me very disappointed! If the previous course gives me the faith to continue learning something in Coursera, this course must be the reason that let me leave the Coursera left.I can't even understand why there are some guys give this course 5 stars. If there is -5 stars option, I'll put this score in front of the lecturer and tell her WHAT A BAD COURSE her give us.",1
27354,Very bad or non-existent support,1
27369,"I requested for a refund and I did not receive it. I guess I won't get it until about 2 weeks. I want a refund because it's too easy, this is stuff I learned in freshman biology. It's nice that it offers resources and links however, I wanted to take a course and get a certificate in one at my level to prove that I can learn beyond a high school biology level. And the course says it's for educators but it doesn't go into much detail on how to actually teach the information. I guess this is good if you want to be a substitute at a middle school or high school, but it's not for me. I was looking for something that was more so at a college level. Also on the important information, they sort of skim over sometimes. I'm 19, I'm not in school because I don't want to waste thousands of dollars on stuff that's elementary so I don't think I could get any special benefits and get courses for free, but that's also the reason why I'm on here, but I'm disappointed to have wasted 50 dollars if they aren't going to refund me. I can barely afford 50 dollars, I'm unemployed and no one will hire. I wanted to take a course in something that would at least get me some kind of job or volunteer work within my field of interest. Seriously, not even these minimum wage jobs will hire you if you didn't go or aren't going to college. Just wanted to feel like I accomplished something suited to my level.",1
27416,Another approach but mathematical demonstration is probably possible.Coursera offer technologies to avoid classroom demos on whiteboard.,1
27524,"No clear explain about which is the right dataset to be downloaded, no support from instructors about that on discussion forum.",1
27552,did not learn anything useful at all.,1
27711,too easy,1
27766,"I would not recommend this one to any paying customer. This is the second intro to Graphic Design class I have take on Coursera, and I found the way the material was presented in the CalArts course to be quite slow and pretty boring. Our assignments were simple and I felt no excitement in doing them. It would have been beneficial to see how these fundamental building blocks could be used in real life design. The other class (by CU-Boulder) made me want to continue learning ,and I felt excited to complete the projects whereas with this class I was forcing myself to sit down to finish just the required ones.",1
27965,"i hate to say it, but this course is really really bad ... not practical at all. i'm not sure where this is all going. maybe by the fourth course in the series, 100 hours later of lectures, you might have something practical but this approach feels wrong. i'm sorry, it's a reputable school and who the hell am I, but one man's opinion: rethink how you go about introducing the newbie to graphic design as it's applicable to the real world.",1
28423,"I was led to believe that I would be learning the fundamentals of graphic design, which to me means learning how to use Photoshop, InDesign, etc. This is more about learning how to create art in general, not exactly what I'm looking for.",1
28439,pathetic,1
28466,"A disorganized mess. Got no acknowledgement that i was turning in assignments. My peer-review assignment for week 1 was done the first week was never peered, reviewed, or peer-reviewed. Completed three weeks, all assignments exactly as instructed. God only knows if anything has been received or credited. I hate myself for getting suckered into this awful thing. Bye Coursera.",1
28469,This course is based on personal anecdotes and not facts. Many of the examples provided have been proven to be farces and/or practical jokes.,1
28625,Too much peer and dealing with others--not making me happy at all,1
28632,Boring,1
28665,"What makes this course useful are the exercises so unless you are paying, don't bother, and it's not really worth paying for as it's just a synopsis of stuff you easily find on youtube.",1
28744,The course modules are too long and at times what the speaker wants to share gets confusing,1
28856,"Lecture uses ""you know"" so much, that I couldn't hear enything else.",1
28864,"Way too many weekly lectures, way too many. In addition to that, lots of the lectures were too long and sometimes even meaningless. It was impossible to follow through.",1
28916,"ridiculous , unscientific 'self-helpie"", far below of even talk-show standards. It gives bad reputation to any business school that endorses such ""course"".""",1
28958,Great and very informa,1
29034,Instead of These Classes Spiritual Classes will be good ...,1
29146,A waste of time. One long advertisement for the instructor's book.,1
29202,"If you didn't like the first few lectures, you won't like the rest. It won't get better. More repetition, clichés, and advertisement that anything else.",1
29246,"*No Stars*Okay.... this class is very pointless. It is super boring and gives me little information. He says that you do not need to buy his book or visit his suggested website, however that is all he talks about.At least the tests are not focused on that, its mostly on vague points he explains. I would not recommend this class.",1
29260,"The guy is full of shit. He's just trying to sell you his book and his online game product. He was also obsessed with bragging about all of his accomplishments. I was quite disgusted by him at the end. I paid for the certification, but now I want my money back.",1
29276,Not learning much and constantly being bombarded with sales tactics. Not impressed.,1
29283,"I was really disappointed in this ""course"" for several reasons. I did not complete it, because it was really not worth spending time on. The organizer impressed me as only wanting to sell copies of his book on dog behavior and used the course as his vehicle. Then there were games to ""purchase"" online to facilitate teaching my dog cognitive skills. The videos were lacking in creativity. I was really disappointed with this, especially since its a cool topic that could easily be presented in a very exciting way. The artistic level, the videos, slides, etc were something a high school student could pull together. After taking solid courses like ModPo and Positive Psychology, I was amazed at the lack of effort that was put into this.",1
29287,This was a giant advertisement and got tiresome very quickly.,1
29298,"The lecturer was an annoying speaker and very repetitive. I just couldn't listen to him... I'm sorry. There was also so much about human development etc that I started to wonder when the info about dogs would start....I found the formatting so different from other courses I've taken, that it was hard to get started and figure things out. Adding to that, was the constant interruption of the ""paid certificate"" page. If I answer ""no"" once, please leave me alone! I also think it's a bit suspect for a prof to be plugging his own book for one of these courses.",1
29321,"I have fallen asleep during 3/4th week, and it have never happened to my during any of the Coursera courses... I'm sorry, but it completely failed my expectations. 3 weeks out of 7 gone, and I have learnt absolutely nothing about dogs. Yes, I got some psychological basis, but that's not what I looked for/ The lecturer politely suggests to buy his book ... well if it is the same quality as the presented course, than it's useless...",1
29323,I just do not feel a connection with this professor - he is constantly plugging his book and the website. The content is just not engaging.,1
29382,Not much here,1
29383,"A waste of money. Only $50, but it was so terrible I did not even want to finish it. And apparently I waited too long to get a refund as well. Never again.",1
29421,Mostly just an ad for the instructor's startup. Very annoying.,1
29428,"This is basically just one giant commercial for the web site. A whole lot of talk, but not a lot of information. I was going to finish the course anyway, to pick up what is in there, but I just cannot stand any more plugs. Very disappointed.",1
29436,"In my opinion:The topics reviewed were too haphazardly selected.The citations for quoted research were hard to impossible to find,The course focused disproportionately on the lecturer's commercial ventures.",1
29498,"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.",1
29508,This course had almost no lectures. It was almost all done in downloadable PDF's that were rarely discussed in the lectures. I never learned why anything happened.,1
29511,"The video lectures are not adequate, too much self-study effort is needed to have a good understanding of the subject. The time allocated for this topic is not enough.",1
29513,The course is very light on substance. There are significantly better courses and books available on the same subject matter. I definitely would not recommend this course.,1
29630,"Very general, and knowledge you could easily acquire from the web. The only difference is the presentation of the information is stretched over an hour worth of video. The most useful part of this course however is the walk-through examples provided.",1
29655,bad for the projects,1
29667,"Totally disorganized, mis-managed, unfairly graded course!",1
29713,"Didn't learn much of anything at all, the peer review system is lazy on the Teacher's part, and half of my classmates couldn't even speak proper English, let alone write it.",1
29746,"Perhaps this class would be good for a non - native english speaker. I went through the first, maybe, five videos. From what I could tell, I learned all of the stuff in this class by the age of 10. If this class is for people who english is a second language, it should be more obviose.",1
29875,Not worth it,1
29949,"Its a hard course, and u may only take the quizzes twice every week.",1
29984,"The course is out of touch with reality and systematically underplays the Paris Agreement, progress of renewable energy and EU emissions mitigation, says absolutely nothing about climate science. At times the attitude is down right hostile and disgusting. Will share these observations widely. We are in a climate emergency and need to do everything we can. When I was taking this course, my city is going through severe flooding and the country is in yellow alert stage due to abnormal thunder storms. You should be ashamed of yourself for pushing this garbage.",1
29992,"Course has not been updated. Wrong answers in quiz (eg week 3 quiz on progressivity), videos getting blocked at review question point, etc. I am checking out.",1
30224,"the peer grading system is poor, considering that they are learning just like us.the grading should be done automatically or by a professional .",1
30254,Really disappointed you have to pay to be able to do the quizzes. I thought the whole point of Coursera is to enhance our skills for free and chose to pay for a certificate if we wanted to.,1
30343,"You should tell people before they enroll that, to take the quizzes, they must pay. It was a waste of time...",1
30408,"The course is great, but I am very disappointed that after spend 3 hours watching the videos and practicing, I can only submit my answer if I upgrade. This should be said before I enrolled in this course.",1
30411,material was good but it doesn't tell you to pay for the course until you take the quiz,1
30490,"A very weak course, gives very little knowledge of grammar, doesn't really explain quite a lot of things. If you are a first year primary school student, this course might be helpful, otherwise a complete waste of time.",1
30491,"This course only works if u pay, which is shit coz most people dont have money...",1
30563,"Course could have earn my stars.Money, money, money is not the way to go.",1
30571,"i dont know why, but it's so frustrating that i have problem with this course. i can't start every quiz in week 4.",1
31110,It most be more effective,1
31192,"Although the course was very useful, I couldn't complete the course due to an assignment. The assignment is very unrealistic and the graders don't give any feedback!! The assignment is open ended question and not difficult but took significant time, when I submit I was unable to pass.",1
31294,Pretty basic stuff.,1
31331,low-level content for people with no teaching background,1
31442,"I would not refer anyone to this course. Although the content is well done, the tech piece of the course is sooooooo frustrating. At one point during the course I kept rating and rating my peersʻ assignments and the system would not accept it. I later found out there was some kind of tech issue. There was NO communication from Coursera whatsoever regarding this--no email, nothing to me or the class as a whole. So, we just had to keep checking and submitting ratings to see if it would finally be accepted. I find this bizarre, to say the least. Now, I am in the third course and the SAME thing is happening! I work full time, have a second job, go to school, raise two boys as a single parent and time is of the essence for me! I do not have time to waste! I keep wasting my time with tech issues. That is so disturbing. Somehow or another we should be kept abreast of tech platform problems. This is crazy.",1
31555,"Content is too basic, seems unresearched. Instructor is distracting in manner in which he presents information - overemphasizes acting over content.",1
31782,"This course has great videos. I give it such a low rating to get your attention and point out some serious problems. This is a certification course in how to teach English as a second language. What was not apparent to me though is that you have to take 2 parts of the specialization before getting certified and it will take over a year! Also, there is close to no teacher participation in the module I took and there are no mentors or student teachers (that might change in future classes I would hope, but no guarantees) and there was close to zero feedback of my work or even in the discussion area and no authoritative feedback. Even the peer reviews require your classmates ONLY to judge you based on whether you actually tried to answer the question, if it was between one and three paragraphs and one other silly thing that I can't even remember now. No one is required to give actual feedback and a lot of the assignments were written by students in horrendous English, but that is not to be considered. With so many people taking this course for whom English is not a first language, even these very simple instructions were often misunderstood and people had problems with getting credit for their assignments. Also, even though the videos are really well-done, they are short and contain little information for the price. I figured that I was paying about $50 an hour for the lectures at regular speed. There are also little to no resource links etc. for further study so the lectures are pretty much the only thing you get. If you are a native English speaker who doesn't mind spending an entire year and the cost for well-done videos on the subject is not important, then this course if for you. If however you think this is going to cost only $200 and you would have interaction with teachers and you would get a certification in about half a year... I want to make sure you realize, that is NOT what this specialization is! If you are NOT a native English speaker, this course is designed well I think for people who do not speak English as a native language, who might even have a low level of English, yet who are teaching English already in foreign countries and would have difficulty acquiring certification any other way and therefore don't mind taking a full year to complete the course or the price and for whom not having someone give them feedback would be considered an asset. I have recommended it to friends who are not native speakers of English, but as a native speaker I found it slow, expensive and the assignments to be actually annoying. It's perfect though for my foreigner friends... as long as they understand it's real length and cost! THE CERTIFICATION WILL TAKE OVER A YEAR AND COST AROUND $400.",1
31925,Very bogus and boring content. The monotonous voice gets me!,1
31945,"This was more objective than I thought. Nevertheless, the information about the Zionism, refute itself and make us criticize about the dangerous notion.",1
32059,I don't know what is the problem as I study the videos well and when it come to taking quiz i never pass so I watch the videos over and aver again but it always the same resultthe part of other languages I'm not sure what is the point of it I mean does it help in English to know how to say for example hi in other languages plz if anyone passed the course . could u plz help me,1
32064,"To difficult to enjoy, unfortunately.",1
32120,"This course is not so good. A lot of things are just come from the instructor's head without correcting reference from high quality literature. He can say whatever he think is right. But I would not say all animals do not have complex language systems, or we have one single origin of language. I would also suggest the instructor to interview more world-famous linguists, not just play simple ask and answer with his students.The examples of different languages in the later weeks are interesting. But somehow I expect some better understanding of more aspects of languages. In general I would say it still has so much space for improvement. I would not recommend anyone to spend time on learning this course.",1
32144,"I do not like this course. There are far too many prejudicial ideas - even in the first unit. A language does not have to be used by a single / unified group to define it as a language. Esperanto is a perfectly valid language, fully capable of expression, and does not belong to a single / unified group. There are no native speakers, either - which does not rob it of the fact that there are winners of the Nobel Prize for literature who write in it. The things you are saying about language are not merely willfully ignorant, they are highly offensive & prejudicial. I cannot conscience supporting a course like this.",1
32148,It's a very dry course. The material is very limited and the coverage has to be more lively with some some relevant examples.,1
32162,Needs to pay for submit assignments,1
32215,it so boring,1
32287,Maybe I was wrong but I expected more medical course with many practical examples and the course is sth like 'explore your creativity in the field and be prepared'.,1
32296,"Bad video quality, errors in tasks and descriptions, no clear path through the course.",1
32366,"The lectures and assignments dealing with Ionic were useful and informative, but that's only the first half of the course. The Android/iOS portion felt extremely rushed. For all of the hassle of setting up my Android environment, I get one week of lectures/exercises out of it and that only covers rudimentary functionality.",1
32377,The material is not mature yet. Some things were not tested by the teacher before being part of the course and do not actually work. Questions asked on the forums about it got no answers before the end of the course.,1
32633,Very US centered and assignment not well connected to the lecture,1
32674,Horrible class. Shame it's in the series.,1
32699,its a fail,1
32734,"Mostly fluff with little substance. The videos seemed loosely tied around a common subject, but it might as well have been a YouTube playlist on overall concepts of cities needing to be aware of climate change. The week 4 videos were the same as the week 1 with very vague statements about cities needing to experiment with sustainability to approach the challenges of the 21st century. Only the week 2 video on Copenhagen was actually educational beyond the most superficial concepts.",1
32779,"Hi,I'm sorry to say that this course wasn't really useful. I had the impression to see dozens of INTRODUCTION videos about sustainables cities. Because:1. In 5 weeks you have time to cover in details all the aspects of sustainable cities: energy, transport, waste, building, sharing economy. The condition is to focus each week to a topic.2. It is too much based on powerpoint presentation and not at all on example. Concepts stay concepts: we didn't visit one single town, a connected building, an innovative waste management system. You quote 300 living labs, let's go !3. Pictures from the powerpoint are at least for half of them taken from pictures bank. Synthetic images, not concrete. Desapointing.4.. Always the same example: Malmo, Copenhagen... What about the rest of the world ?5. Videos from WWH and ICLEI are clearly revolting. Is it some publicity for them ??? This is not the place for that.In contrast, congratulations to Yuliya Voytenko, for her speech about sharing economy: it was clear, precise, focused.Please do your best to improve your courses: you have the knowledge, let's spread it.",1
32817,I was somewhat disappointed with the content of this course. It seems shallow and disintegrated to me. Its difficult to say that this course provides some practical knowledge.,1
32992,it is very boring course no coding just watching a lady talking and talking and talking it is really very boring to do that,1
33316,"A lot of theoretical stuff, nothing for practice; awful final exam strategy, the course encourages learning by heart without any thinking; advice: to help non english students (like me), make the lectures not overlapping the subtitles",1
33372,"Poorly executed. Lost my interest very quickly. I thought that this course was going to be as enjoyable as Dr. Chuck's Python for Everyone given that both instructors are from the same institution, and both courses belong to similarly named specializations, that is ""...For Everyone"", but I ended up disappointed. My suggestion for the instructor: redo your lecture slides or point out to all of the errors in the slides. It is not acceptable for you to just say that they contain errors and not point out where all of the errors in the slides are. You only pointed out to one error in the slides by the way. Also, I personally believe that it would have been much more interesting if you had not read off a screen for your lectures; try speaking off the top of your head.",1
33546,I expected more coding examples.,1
33594,"The grading system I dont like it. I coded and validated, yet it returned error to me. I was frustrated that I had to opt out of the course.",1
33612,"Its ok. HTML is not ""Code"" its a Mark-Up Language. When she cant explain sheo covers it up with attitude words or skips quickly.",1
33745,"I would have rated this course with 5 stars if it wasn't for the Autograder that marked the final assignment, which made that I didn't even get to pass the course, although, according to me and everyone I had contact with regarding this course, my code was correct! Everything else was very well done, and I congratulate Ms. van Lent on her course. I will be going on to the next course in this specialization, because all the autograders for the rest of it has been removed. Thank goodness!",1
33749,"The instructor might be a good web developer, but neither she nor anyone else on her team know how to write a parser. Unfortunately, that is exactly what they attempted to do for grading Final Projects.Unless you are ready to suffer through several hours of tearing your hair out because their parser does not accept perfectly written code, don't take this course. The only thing you'll learn through the experience is that some people should stay as far away from writing autograders as the planet would allow them.Additionally, the information presented in this course is available in several better structured and presented versions both on Coursera and other MOOC platforms. So you don't need this course in particular in order to learn the material.",1
33765,"autograder will not accept my valid code that contains all valid elements, will not make the deadline so will not bother continuing.",1
33822,Too many mistakes in the math. I dropped after a week,1
33891,The weakest of the series so far. Overlap with some of the other courses. Too much art therapy.,1
33892,"As an educator myself, I found this class to be rather pathetic in its structure and the assignments. These are topics and activities that I was doing as a student in middle school and junior high (both public schools mind you, not arts centered charters). Charging people for a certificate in this ""class"" is tantamount to what diploma mills do as the course requirements are not up to even senior high school level coursework. Truly, Coursera, what happened to your open education offering real education?",1
33896,"A weaker version of ""Fundamentals of Graphic Design"" with way too much overlap. It should not be included in the Specialization.",1
33912,I was quite disappointed with this class. The videos and instructions are very short and the information is lacking. When reviewing other classmates material it was quite clear that people were confused with the assignments because I saw such a huge range of submissions that were very different from each other.I found the material to be very similar to the first course in this specialization; both asked very similar things but this class didn't add much to the process.,1
33942,Nothing interesting. Common information about nothing. Sorry,1
33946,I personally did not find it constructive enough to spend money on.It is way too general and basic. I expected something more articulated and not so elementary,1
33948,I thought this course would be more fun and interesting but I find it VERY repetitive with the Fundamentals of Graphic Design. If you buy the package it kind of seems like I wasted $79 dollars on a repetitive and monotone professor and course. I would not recommend this course within the specialization.,1
34063,This g,1
34064,"This course offer a lot of interesting topics, but the way of their presentation is not very amazing, so the student loses easily the concentration.",1
34065,Quizzes and assignments cannot be submitted if course is audited.,1
34139,Speaker is not energetic or something lacking.. makes it boring.,1
34159,Very short not good It doesnt give anything about entrepreneurship,1
34175,No real applicable knowledge gained,1
34187,Extremely generic and a but to much of self-promotion.,1
34218,I did not conclude the course because of the fundamentally wrong guidance that this lecturer promotes. Today we know more advanced and useful methodologies for entrepreneurship.,1
34244,"Not a fan of this course. Reasons:1) The subject material is presented in a dry manner (too much talking and jargon) - I find it repetitive and boring. I have to play it at least 1.75x in order to get through the material and try and stay engaged but I still have a hard time paying attention. Seriously, so boring!2) There is a high degree of subjectivity in grading essays (peer reviews)This course can benefit from:1) Clearer introduction of concepts using pictures and animations, as well as cutting out the repetitiveness (and the assault of the jargonaut)2) A better approach to grading that places importance on concepts instead of key words (jargon)",1
34294,"This course is sorely out of date and in need of a refresh. Using 2012 statistics to describe the state of global terrorism today may be an interesting history lesson, but only serves to show how much more dangerous previously safe regions are today.",1
34331,"The most boring course i have ever done in my life... Soporific course, Content interesting, but professor is just reading slides, with reading mistakes every 2-3 words. I would not recommend this course at all.",1
34332,"Poor presentation skills (mostly reading slides)Unclear and inconsistent in what pre-requisite knowledge is needed for the course (in one place he assumes one does not know digital logic, but then later he assumes you know hardware languages, fpga design, etc.).Was a waste of time, shame on Coursera that pre-requisite knowledge was removed from the site.",1
34333,Very slow paced and boring. The instructor is not good at teaching.,1
34335,"Some content is good and informative but there's a big problem with the teacher accent (adding a ""ch"" at the end of half the words) and his diction (hesitating on the other half the words). Also it seems that the course was created in a rush and lacks a lot of polishing(*). Sometimes the course assumes a good level in computer science and then 2 minutes later it explains how to do a decimal to binary conversion! This makes many videos boring but the slides are not provided so you really have to view the videos entirely. I've followed much harder courses with pleasure but here it was torture to finish it. Also most of the course is just definitions of some specific terms and not practical explanations. I agree that defining a few words is important but here it's just too much. *: Some videos are in reverse order, some are stopped in the middle of a sentence, some quizzes are bugged and don't give credit properly and there's nobody to help students...",1
34337,The material used for this course is so old that makes me feel I'm taking a course in the 90's. The narration is very dull and therefore hard to follow. Really disappointing.,1
34338,"The quality of the slides, video, and presentation in this course is much lower than those offered by this Speciality or coursera in general. Very disappointed in this.",1
34531,amateurish presentation. and there is some technical issue with the content. the video gets stuck a lot and the problem is not my internet.,1
34533,"Course itself is a 4 star, pretty good. The service from Coursera a one star. An assignment was submitted by the deadline but was never reviewed. Course closed and they say I have to enroll in the next course. What a huge pain. Wont take Coursera classes again for certificate.",1
34657,"This course is clickbait for the purpose of soliciting information about the private life of participants. It barely contains any facts, and it contains in total zero references to studies that facts are taken from. This shouldn't be on Coursera, and an organization making a course like this shouldn't be allowed to call itself a university.",1
34680,Never received a certificate or a grade. No one responds to email. I will never purchase anything through Coursera.,1
34688,Very hard to understand,1
34722,I should have never paid for this course. By the time I got into the subject the refund policy was expired. Do not take pay for this course or program at all.,1
34738,not very well organized.,1
34914,Crippleware if you don't,1
34917,"I think this course has a lot of value, but when I started these course I was unaware I would need a few hundred more dollars and did not budget for such things.",1
34920,Having to pay before you take the course is really disappointing. Not many students to interact with because of this. Course was very basic also. Not worth the money. Coursera offers many quality courses which are much better than this one.,1
34966,very difficult to follow the lectures due to the heavy accent,1
34970,"The course started a month late, when it finally started it was boring. I can' believe i paid for the certificate. Despite paying for it i'm not going to bother completing it.",1
35066,Too many bugs with Coursera. Issues occur with submissions. System indicates submissions were successfully submitted. Then when you log back in it indicates your assignment is over due. Now I can't,1
35073,"The first few weeks are truly beginner/intro course stuff and the entire course is well taught. However, weeks 4-7 ramp up at far too fast of a pace. I spent 8-10 hours every week trying to keep up and it just moved too fast. The instructor was doing things at breakneck speed with little explanation. It gets very discouraging by the end because you simply can't play the material. I think this course is really for people who are re-learning guitar or already have musical backgrounds.",1
35129,"I was looking for a course for a basic learner, this is not. I feel it very complicate and not friendly for a person with 0% guitar skills.",1
35272,"This course starts off interesting and then just gets absurd. A huge chunk of the genetic part has activities where you have to translate large genetic sequences by hand. If you don't have access to a printer, trying to break up genetic codes into 3-letter codons and translating them is an exercise in frustration. Plus the sequences are not even easily formatted for printing as they are all images so you can't even just copy them into an editor and break up the sequences.This was only the second course I dropped on Cousera.",1
35273,"Very unclear in the way it was presented and the subject that are being talked about and not very interesting, partly because it was to easy for me.",1
35285,"Half of the links to external readings and videos did not work, which is the reason I did not complete the course. It made taking the quizzes fairly impossible unless I wanted to spend my time googling the answers.",1
35423,"Very little content on offer other than some short clips and mildly interesting readings. The vast majority of the course is dedicated to short writing tasks that are supposed to get you engaged (i.e. discussing) diplomacy, but the practical effect is at best busy work with little new knowledge or insights gained. Extremely disappointed.",1
35428,"I have completed two other Coursera courses for certificates, where I learned much more. The quantity and quality of the content - both video's and reading materials - is significantly lower than that of the other courses, where I really had to take notes and read much more. The assignments are way to general and do not require much preparation, which hardly makes them serious learning exercises. Frankly, I could have done some interviews and research online and make a a course like this myself...",1
35445,Too many speakers. Not very well-coordinated or organized. Very wordy and diffuse. Where is the gist of what they are saying in so many words?,1
35463,very general ideas about diplomacy but nothing concrete,1
35513,"I dislike the way the grade is settled. Because of the difficulty and technicality of the course, passing grade should be 7 out of 9, instead of 8 out of 9. We are not PhD's, but student learners.......",1
35675,"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",1
35741,This class setting is interesting. You cannot participate in assignments and quizzes unless pay for certificate.,1
35764,All the guests were women. Imagen if all the guests had been men!!!,1
35941,This course is,1
35968,"This course is about nothing, it is poor illustrated and uninformative. The lecturer's manner is anno",1
35987,"OK, you can learn a few things getting into this course and it's still available for free on the platform so thanks for that!However and most of all, you can sense that this is more of an advertising campaign for AXA IM than an investment course per se... During the 4 modules, you're basically repeated over and over again that Active Management (ie. Investment Managers) tend to overperform and that you should have one manager.There's even the overall 1st part of Module 4 that is dedicated on how to select a manager...There are some great insight related to portfolio allocation but not much explanations. A major point that I would have liked to hear about is how to come up with the risk aversion criteria... Many parts of the course relate to external videos available on Youtube.If you're going to advertise on such a platform as Coursera please don't make it too much about the advertising and more about learning... (for example: Melbourne University Specialization).",1
36046,"It is not free. They just sell the certificates. There is not any free statement about accomplishment of the course, so nobody will knows that you have completed it. In the future you have not got anything to show in your CV.I want my Statement of Accomplishment.",1
36302,"Neo-liberal and neo-con presentation of the matter that has little to do with how the real world works, or should work, had we had a fair play field. Would not expect anything else from the neo-liberal flagman, Yale. Pretty much expected it would be the case, but just wanted to give it a try.",1
36336,"I am disappointed about this course. I was expecting to learn more in this subject as described on the course info. However, the quality of the lectures is not good at all. I haven't found any lecture that present the knowledge as the Ivy league University as Yale. I felt sorry for the students who actually attained this class at Yale campus. The professor was not prepare for the lectures and confused/forgot sometime. I was hoping that the Nobel prize winner would teach something that complicated in the simple way. The questions in the exam ask mostly about year, person, numbers which is not the good exam per my perspective. If you want the have the certificate from Yale, you can take this course. BUT if you want to learn about Financial Markets, I would not recommend this course. I'm so sorry.",1
36399,"Terrible course: (i) the lecturer seems to be ""all over the place"", briefly touching on several aspects of finance in a superficial way, without much coherence with respect to each week's theme; (ii) the lecturer speaks in a very confusing way, without formulating clear sentences and often divagating from the main topic with minor details that are neither necessarily relevant, nor properly explained; (iii) the few formulas that the lecturer presents are treated as if they have fallen from the sky en bloc, without explaining bit by bit how they are obtained; (iv) the main points of each lecture are not stressed sufficiently enough, leaving one to wonder what the take-home messages are at the end of each lecture.I give the course one star due to the appreciated emphasis that the lecturer places on unorthodox economic approaches, such as behavioural economics, and on the important issue of finance democratisation.",1
36506,"Bad course, a lot of talking but no explainantion. Non of the math is explained. and that is themajurity of the questions that come back in the tests",1
36519,"Very scattered and long lessons. Very difficult to learn something that is not ""textual"". Examination is based on literal terms (e.g: what year was XX reform enacted""). Not the type of knowledge I thought I would get",1
36521,I have a hard time focusing on what he is trying to say. He seems all over the place and doesn't seem to follow a path that I can understand. I'm sure live it's different but when you're taking it online and parts are,1
36561,No systematic presentation of concepts. Very hard to follow.,1
36668,the wieos are not targeting online students. The videos are long but not teaching many things. The course is too gneral.,1
36824,Waste of money. What I learned in the first course could is useless information.,1
36835,"I was incredibly excited to start this course. The outline looks amazing. For learning mediums like this, you have to start strong. Keep up the great work, you all look like you know what you're doing. You should certainly put some polish on all these videos. It's near impossible to follow along. I'd be curious in seeing the data on how many of your students finish this course.",1
36846,"Boring, most of them are history. Don't worth it ! 1 week into the course, very boring. Not technical enough. The test basically asked people to remember things that are not useful !",1
36848,"You should rename it to 90s style history of comunication from Bell to nowdays with useless facts about it.I watched almost all first block but then I understood that I learnt nothing than I tried the IoT block, but it still wordy and superficial. Use more media to show your main ideas, take a class of public speaking and stop shaking a remote all the time you dont even use it.",1
36858,"Nothing to do with IoT, misleading title and waste of time, apart from several incorrections in the novel narration.",1
36865,a 10 page reading could have make it. not enough material to be consider a course,1
36871,Very confused. So there is little point. Only vague news ... nothing substantial!,1
36887,"Course advertised incorrectly. This course is more on the electronics and embedded systems end of IoT, as opposed to a high-level perspective.",1
36893,"Story telling module, not really useful for IOT purpose.",1
36902,The presenter are very annoying and i did not learn anything from this...,1
36903,"Big part of the course videos devoted to history of how the technology was developed, not much technical information about the technology itself.",1
36957,It is very old technique of teaching,1
37005,very bad demonstration,1
37253,"very hard for beginners, very boring for others. also missleading concepts",1
37277,I'm pretty much always turned off when a course won't let those who are auditing the course (i.e. not paying) take the assessments. I'm dropping out.,1
37284,"I wouldn't never recommend this course. The teacher gives you all inforation without normal explan. You have chanse to understand HTML and CSS, but Js . JS leguage need more deteils, exemples and explaining, who I didn't find in this course. The first course is a basis for late courses and so weak teacher. I took the next series of course coz I saw that there are other tacher",1
37520,Did not email when graded and had to email for everything to be fixed. Example projects were not similar at all to actual projects and relied heavily on search engines to figure out what was asked of me,1
37769,"Take this course if you want to get depressed out of ever learning any programming.The structure is this:-tons of info about stuff with unclear application-tons of info about stuff with unclear application-tons of info about stuff with unclear application-a gigantic task where you don't actually use half of the material from before, but instead need to use some material from the future module or from just googling things.You never get to understand why what you wrote didn't work and why it should be the way your classmate wrote it.The course makers don't seem to be interested in your feedback.",1
37775,This class does not go in depth enough for debutant people to figure out how to do the assessments or gain a good understanding of what is covered.,1
37826,The teacher is boring,1
37903,"The course and specialization looks promising but I get the feeling that the instructors have been a little lazy while designing the assignments. Instead of auto-grading using well known testing frameworks (like other Coursera courses), the entire grading policy is based on reviews from fellow students which makes your grade subjective, secondly, since the number of mandatory required reviews for each student is fixed at 5 (and is not adjusted with the number of students), it is highly unlikely that all submissions will be reviewed or graded.",1
37934,"I think it's useless. Spending that amount of time explaining this basics it is not worth it. I'd rather go deeper in AngularJS, NodeJS or Ionic, after all this is a course for a mid level, so you should go to another course to take the basics and here a more advanced level.",1
37984,1. We didn't have any feedback.2. I couldn't review my partners because there isn't projects to review.3. Teacher never answer forums.,1
38051,"Originally, I rated this course 3-stars. However, I have since decided it is worth 1-star after taking the next course in the series, Bootstrap. I thought that there wasn't enough time to cover all the material to make this course good. After taking the next course, I see that it is possible to deliver a lot of material and concepts in short order. However, it takes thinking, planning, and dedication. I think this course is TERRIBLE and seriously needs an overhaul. After taking this course, you barely know any CSS and despite passing assignments that don't challenge, you're probably worse off than a student who fails in school.The course suffers from the extremely short timeframe. Covering one of each of the three core topics a week is just insufficient to provide any sort of depth to this course. While there are supplementary readings, Coursera and the participating institutions need to understand that there are those who are taking courses to get more than a one page Wiki style coverage of a topic.",1
38239,I do not see review by teachers.I had biggest expectatives. Very disappointed.Some reviewers don't see beyond the format.The system has glitches. Still appear messages that were reviewed and sent.,1
38268,Very little real content or information.,1
38316,"This class (the fourth in the specialization) required a different version of Unity 3D in order to complete (compared to the first course in the specialization). Using a borrowed laptop, I was not permitted to upgrade to a new version by laptop owner. Signing up for the 5-course specialization and paying in advance was a ripoff since the software requirements changed in between course 3 and 4. Coursera gives no refunds for a 5-course specialization if you have completed the first course.",1
38390,"No use for me. No music examples because copyrights did not allow, so the course is pretty boring.Sorry, not for me.",1
38512,This course and material does not articulate the 'Google Cloud Platform' offerings. Maybe Google does not want to compete with Microsoft Azure and AWS alike. If Google itself has approved this 'Google Cloud Platform' trainings on Coursera then vola I am out. I am way better off supporting AWS and Azure (at least they have tons of good trainings and stuff to keep folks in the field excited).,1
38515,"Too much marketing BS, practically zero valuable information, 5 minute videos (targeted at tinder audience probably?)",1
38534,The instructor was terrible. Very dull,1
38538,"Drink everytime the lecturer said ""Google"" without reason. You won't make it 5 minutes.The content of the lecture can be shorter, too much commercials in the lecture. The questions don't echo what was in the lecture (vs AWS for example).",1
38579,Boring,1
38613,"If you do not already know java (or at least have some experience with it) I would NOT recommend this class. They say all you need to have is very basic computer knowledge (sending emails, opening a browser), but the lectures are taught using acronyms and terms that are not at the beginner level. Even the basic concepts are explained using advanced terms or examples that contain code far beyond a beginners level.They also do not really spend any time going over the programming basics. They discuss them a bit, but they never really give you a bigger picture or really how all the concepts you've learned fit together. There is no real consistency throughout the course, it just seems like they are throwing random concepts at you and hoping you understand. Then they throw you an assignment that requires you to do rather complicated coding (for a true beginner) without any other form of practice before hand.The assignments are also a bit of a mess. All you are really doing is 'filling in the blank'. They give you all this code that has already been written without actually tell you how do to that yourself or what a vast majority of it does and you have to fill in code in a couple places to make it work. But since everything else is written, you can not run the code as you write it to check your work. It will fail because the code is looking for things you haven't written yet. You must write the entire assignment before you can see if the first line of code you wrote works. I find this to be a very poor teaching method. You should be able to check your work as you go, or experiment with different ways of writing things. Instead you are forced to write exactly what they expect.",1
38641,"As other reviewers have noted, this course is NOT for beginning programmers! (Unless maybe you are a mathematical genius with total recall.)I have a little background in programming, HTML and CSS, but I found this course to be an absolute nightmare. It would be interesting to find out if any of the rave reviews came from real beginners.Most of the problems have already been noted by other reviews, so I will only mention a few that I did not see mentioned.The course requirements should include hardware and software essentials. In particular, the student has no choice but to use Android Studio. If their system is not running a 64bit OS at 2.4 GHz with at least 8 GB of RAM, it can literally take DAYS for Studio to complete the build so that the student can do anything with assignment code.There is a desperate need for a glossary. The course dives in with more acronyms than the military, and assumes the attmpting learner already has a handle on APIs, SDKs, etc., not to mention many other technical terms (interfaces, ...). If I asked the average programmer to evaluate the MT based on comparisons with the Complutensian Polyglot and Codex Alexandricus, the effect would probably be about the same.Another glaring omission for beginners is a battery of exercises for each concept/skill.As for ""We've organized all these topics into units that represent roughly 4-6 hours of work each,"" that is absurd! If you multiplied that by 10, it would still be a stretch.I have no doubt about the programming and technical competence of the instructors (though there are some errors in a number of the instructions). And I'm sure they are very nice people who really want others to learn. The root problem seems to be what professional communicators call ""The Curse of Knowledge"" -- a syndrome in which a person is so familiar with their subject that they cannot begin to imagine what it is like for someone who is not.My recommendation to a beginner is to look somewhere else. Take a good introductory course in Java before diving into the vastly more complex world of the Android environment. I am not qualified to evaluate the course from the perspective of an experienced programmer, but I have noted that they are frustrated by clutter caused by token attempts to make this a beginner course.My recommendation to the faculty is to completely re-engineer this whole specialization. They should have a separate set of courses truly designed for beginners, and they should get help from qualified instructional designers who specialize in online adult education. (Might not be a bad idea to get the VU English department to review the lecture text as well.)My recommendation to anyone is to never believe anything Coursera tells you about a course. Audit the course BEFORE you pay any money! This is especially important if the course has not actually started. This course started two months late, and I could not get a refund before the course even got under way!After taking nearly 6 months to wade through a little over half the course requirements, I decided to look at the rest of the assignments and project. This removed all doubt that to continue was a hopeless waste of time. So, I decided to end the nightmare, and I'm glad it's over!",1
38649,"Very very bad communication from the teachers. The 2nd MOOC was supposed to start I think 2.5 months ago, it did not start at the time of this review.They did not even bother to post some announcement to let the students know : ok course starts in x months.Making things worse, you cannot get a refund if you purchased the entire thing.",1
38660,"First time I gave 1 star. Reason, lecturers are terrible. This deserves a report, if there was adequate reporting system on Coursera. I had a feeling like I was watching professors from school for disabled, and not an university. . . Course material is actually decent, but extremely badly presented. Sadly, I enrolled into second course as well, and hoping that one will be better, so I wont have to go through refund hell.",1
38661,"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.",1
38662,"Basing on the first videos, I would not recommend this course to anyone believing that ""You are expected have basic computer literacy skills, such as knowing how to send & receive emails and browse the web"".The lector is robotic, the slides look outdated, listener is bored after 10 min of watching. I definitely WOULD NOT pay for this course.I will change the rate after I watch more videos, but this course is a big no-no for me.",1
38673,"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.",1
38679,"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.",1
38695,"i gave this course 1 star not because its bad in content, its just because i was expecting more due to the fact it has been delayed several times; then when it finally came it was like any other youtube or online tutorial. i was expecting something as big as udacity but unfortunately its not. Don't expect to know or understand java with this course, no practical or step by step example in this course. what makes it worst is the fact they never show you how to build an app from scratch while the only app they have in this course, they dont do it. you have to do it on your own.dont get me wrong. all of them are good instructors but the way they did it, its definitely is not a beginner friendly. give a calculator as an assignment to build while you never built one app in this course, i think its not an effective way to teach. i will not pay for this specialization. i will do the udacity nanodegree one",1
38698,The Assignment questions are unclear due to which a lot of time has to be invested.,1
38722,This course and material does not articulate the 'Google Cloud Platform' offerings. Maybe Google does not want to compete with Microsoft Azure and AWS alike. If Google itself has approved this 'Google Cloud Platform' trainings on Coursera then vola I am out. I am way better off supporting AWS and Azure (at least they have tons of good trainings and stuff to keep folks in the field excited).,1
38846,Bloody coursei am very much angry with this course,1
39123,Very poor explanations.,1
39147,Very limited content. Not possible to complete the projects at the end. -(,1
39175,"I am disappointed with the course because of its only focus on Apple TV and smartwatch apps. The course structure is a bit messy and the content is quite technical. Don't call it ""App Design"" since it's more App Development!",1
39177,I dislike whole specialization.Because videos are waste of time. They are teaching little things with long videos. Also I don't easily understand the accent of the speaker.,1
39188,Bad content and instructor. no logistic in place. if you are planning to pay to get certificate. I would suggest look else where. my $279 are stuck in here and they don't reply to forum posts.,1
39190,"The material is very poorly explained. Pre-coded stuff isn't good either, as it's very hard to comprehend, even with the professor's explanations, which also don't seem to be aimed at beginners.",1
39201,"The entire course lacks a ""flow"". It looks like concepts that are taught are picked at random and stuffed into the course. The quizzes really do not complement the material taught. The instructor wants the students to focus on specific wordings of his lecture rather than the concepts, in order to pass the quizzes.",1
39222,I can't reach the course contents because of new deadline that Coursera has invented,1
39234,"This course was delivered 6-months behind schedule and the assignments half-way through the course can't even be completed due to technical problems and sloppy content. When students try to seek support to fix the issues, nothing is done and they receive no response. The specialization started so well, but the care that was taken to craft the specialization course content in the beginning has been lost in the later courses.",1
39243,"The videos were very tedious and convoluted, in addition to being outdated. Almost all of the methods were deprecated by the time I was taking this course. I wouldn't recommend this course at all.",1
39249,"DO NOT TAKE THIS COURSE - THE guy who reads (not teaches) the course, Justin-Nicholas Toytama is horrendous. He's too lazy to even type out the codes and has the world's most monotonous voice.He pauses often to read this notes and has 0 enthusiasm teaching this class. If this class is not part of the certificate specialization, i wouldn't even pay for this course. $64 gets you further with Nick Walter or Rob Percival's Udemy course.",1
39253,"Instructor voice is too low and intro music is too high.Video quality is bad.Course content is for very beginners people, beginners to programming not only to Swift.Sorry to say it, but this course is really bad. Does not deserve to be in this specialization!",1
39271,"1- Almost no content , all just general knowledge2- the instructor was very hard to follow, his intonation is totally off and the sentences are broken so you can't connect the thoughts together.3- There was no forum and thus no interaction.",1
39274,"Actually, I am quite disappointed by this course. The language is so slow that it is terribly difficult to make sense of each sentence.The content barely scratches the surface and there is neither a forum, nor an exchange with other learners. I miss interactivity and I am glad that I decided to preview the course and not pay for it as it definitely is not worth the money.",1
39281,"I have always loved the Coursera courses that I have taken, but this one is dramatically below the standard. It is lacking in terms of content, pedagogy, and production. I truly hope that this isn't the direction that Coursera is headed in, as this class seems more like a cheap self-help seminar than an academic course of study.",1
39285,Too theorical and bold course,1
39288,"I felt that the delivery was not effective. The pacing and tone of the speech was challenging for me to listen to. There were unnatural pauses within sentences, causing the lectures to drag out longer than necessary and it was difficult to connect the thoughts of a sentence together because of the unnatural pauses. The result of this was that it it required an inordinate amount of effort to understand each sentence and to put together the sentences into meaning.",1
39292,"too easy, little content, can pass course easily without watching any of the videos",1
39294,I really did want to take this course in a specialization mode. However I sampled some of the course videos in the different courses making this specialization and decided against it.In the course videos we see no teacher or lecturer just pictures of people and power-point slides with a flat voice in the background reading the slides. In my opinion this does very little in making this topic interesting as it comes out flat and more work should have been put into making of this MOOC considering one has to pay for the specialization. There were also no discussion forums of any kind available. More work should be put into the making of the lecture videos by the school to give it a realistic classroom experience.Unfortunately I dropped out of the MOOC because of the poor quality done by the school despite it being a topic of interest for me.,1
39410,Disorganized.,1
39412,He teaches even worse then me. This course has no practical example. It's just introduction(from start to end).When I enrolled in this course I was expecting that at the end of this course I will be able to develop an app or anything like that. But know I think that I have just wasted my time.,1
39435,No need for videos if all the teacher does is reading his slides.,1
39437,Prof is simply reading from slides. No value-added,1
39441,It's a 2 week course that's not particularly difficult or creative with the assessments.,1
39444,"I really wouldn't call this a course, just an overview of VR & AR technologies and really general principle of work for AR. It took be less than an hour to watch everything and pass the tests.",1
39445,The content is interesting but the presentation can be improved so that audience will not fall asleep easily.,1
39449,"This course is one of the few lesser courses I've seen on Coursera, since the course instructor has shown little commitment to course material preparation compared to other course instructors. He reads off the bullet points on the powerpoint slides without any elaboration. This seems to be part of an introductory specialization to emerging technologies. Yet merely stating keywords without explaining them makes the learning process very difficult for learners new to the fields. With the video lecture length totaling at ~1.5 hours, this ""course"" clearly needs to have more materials. A learner should not be tricked into paying $39 for an 1.5 hour reading of powerpoint slides.I have watched a few video lectures of the other courses in this specialization, and the presentation of material reflects problems aforementioned.Please considerably improve this course or remove this specialization from course catalog. It's not fair for us learners and other course providers who want to revolutionize online learning experience.",1
39451,"Very poor .........Never expected this from COURSERA. The person is just reading the slides, there is no learning action taking place",1
39467,very basic overview. Outdated in some way when it comes e.g. on AR feature extraction methods,1
39495,Not that interesting.Many buzz words little knowledge,1
39502,"The proffessor only reads the slides and do nothing more. No technical explanation included, only some keyword provided.",1
39509,"Completely not what I've expected, too theoretical without examples and explanations..",1
39515,The professor just read the slides (and most of the slide and content are repetitive.) The content of the entire course can be studied in less than 3 hour (so did the other courses of this Specialization.) It's not a good course and I think it's not worth to purchase these classes.,1
39517,non-rich course!,1
39726,"Videos are poorly edited (too much blank space, the bullet points are not clearly visible, there is no narrative or discursive structure, the diagrams are not clear, and the interviews are raw and unedited). Sessions are too long and include too much irrelevant information. The little useful information there is, is not structured clearly and thus it's harder to learn. The material for the first 3 weeks resemble more to someone talking about ""the good ol' days"" rather than a properly thought-out history class. I had to leave the course as I found it to be a waste of my time, and I am glad I decided not to pay for a certificate for it. My expectations were a lot higher for a University course.",1
39748,"Perhaps it's just that I'm not a part of the target audience of this course, but I am deeply dissatisfied with it. Aside from a couple of rare interviews and old video records [which admittedly were very interesting, though too few], I found nothing of value that cannot be learned by reading Wikipedia or other easily accessible sources. The course is pretty light on technical details and there could [and perhaps should] have been much more beyond-the-scenes content, as well as references to specific documents and events in order to justify this course's existence.In other words, if you are a techie and are indeed interested in this topic, chances are that you already know most of the material taught.",1
39926,"While the content is very helpful and Gary does his best to make people confident to improvise in Jazz music, this course has imho two major flaws:The biggest one: assignments given and results accepted do not fit together. E.g. in week 1 learners are supposed to describe in their own words how a piece of music does sound like. But the accepted answers are totally different from such a description. Instead only a very detailed and specialized answer is accepted. This leads to studends copying these answers into their assignments without them learning anything.The other flaw is that Gary is very brief in his explanations. Even intermediate musicians seem to struggle with content just because some explanations are not exact or vague.",1
39969,The gobbledygook mooc. Worst bunch of talking a lot and saying nothing I ever encountered.,1
40087,"There is very little insight in this course. The instructor's slides are very poorly-done, relying on graphs that aren't appropriate for the data being presented and without labeling the axises. There is no engagement in the course forums. The quizzes are trivial to pass.",1
40171,"Very basic. Everything in here can be found online on a blog, youtube video or a book. dont waste your money.",1
40213,Instructor is clearly reading off of cards or a prompter that doesn't face the camera so he's constantly not looking at you which is frustrating. The feeling of each lesson being so scripted takes away from the feeling of a professor teaching material with which he is comfortable. Comparing this to UC San Diego course videos is like night and day and really makes you realize the importance of quality production/natural flow of teaching.,1
40237,"The quality of the lectures and teaching was the lowest i have ever seen on Coursera. I wanted to do the whole specialty, but after this first one i was so disappointed that i will stop. The assignments were overly complicated and demanding for no real reason. I have used Coursera for years and this is the first time I have wanted a refund.",1
40287,This course doesn't worth the price. It just split a semester long course into eight chapters.,1
40297,Any course that requires a webcam is not serious. What a bunch of ridiculous crap. Is this for adults trying to learn or teenage girls trying to chat?,1
40300,not a good course,1
40301,amazing! Thanks a lot,1
40339,"Nothing but badly put together videos and recommendations for readings. The only terrible course on Coursera I've come across, and I've done a few dozen of them.",1
40340,just a collection of materials you'd find in any museum..,1
40353,"Very interesting, but I was really hoping more. For example, the professor does not teah us directly, like all the other courses on Coursera. It is only texts and archive videos.....Youtube would have done the same. Disappointed.",1
40361,"The URLs for the course's required readings are presented as non-clickable text in the course lecture videos. There is no list of URLs for the readings available which I could find, and to take this course students are required to copy dozens of long, cumbersome web addresses from the videos.",1
40362,"A nice idea but very poorly done. This would be cool topic to learn about but it is just so poorly executed.Week 1 was just introduction. Week 2 seemed okay, reasonably interesting with a video that although was somewhat dated in style managed to grab my attention for the 40 or so minutes in length.However Week 3 is where I get off. A 16 minute video of slides, with only a couple of minutes of narration in total with what seems like about 20 links to random articles over the internet Links to articles to read would be fine if done well, but with very little to join them up and link them back to the subject at hand is a bit boring. Also the worst part - the slides aren't posted so in order to get to these articles I had to pause the video and letter by letter type them into the address bar. I gave up after the third article and hit leave course.",1
40474,"Just garbage. This course and its twin ""Introduction to Smart IoT Devices"" are an expression of imposture at high level. Fortunately, the other courses in EIT Digital series are very interesting.",1
40518,"Databases very difficult to work with, and badly programmed.",1
40580,It's not on architecture for IoT as name suggests. It's general software architecture course.,1
40589,"The course presents lots of concepts and papers, but it doesn't really seems applicable in reality.It felt too ""fluffy"" and subjective to me.",1
40641,one of the worst course ever,1
40649,"Low on actionable content. Was looking for some specific tactics to use, but even though the course syllabus refers to tactical information on influencing people, it lacked any specificity to make it useful.",1
40740,This is a joke right?5 minutes long videos with questions after it shall teach me effective?!you guys are ridiculous!,1
40774,mind-numbingly boring,1
41046,Primitive and useless,1
41135,"I went in this course with high expectations. After I watched all of the videos for the first week and saw the hilarious homework I quickly checked what this is about.LESS THAN 3 HOURS OF VIDEOS! Not to mention paying, you will be better off with Extra Credits...",1
41151,"Quite useless. I didnt feel that I learned anything at all. Assingments seem to be dessinged by someone very lazy. The limitations of the assingments do not allow the students to practice what its been tought, but it is asked in the peer assingment from the students to evaluate it!. I understand that when calling it ""Introduction"", it is supposed to be aimed for people totally starting from 0. But still, I cant see how this course is of any use. It is short and does not cover anything. I am very surpirsed that getting the certificate for this course costs the same (in $) than getting the certificate of the Introduction to Principles of Game Design. Principles of Game Design has more than double hours of classes and in the assingments you actually create a game and practice new stuff. This course was very dissappointing.",1
41248,Much less technical than I had anticipated. Much more policy-driven. Disappointing.,1
41273,"I found the course was very confusing and the language used in the quizzes and exams didn't always match the language used in the lessons making it very difficult to understand what was wanted.For a non-specialist, statistics is almost always a struggle, intently making it more difficult by trying to use trick questions and application in the quizzes and exam beyond what was covered in the course makes it really really difficult for those of us who are naturals at math.I worked really hard in the course and finally made it thought all 6 weeks of the course but after one try at the final exam I said to myself enough is enough. I hate being a quitter, but I was not learning statistics and causing myself many headaches and feelings of inferiority and self-doubt because I just couldn't match the quiz and exam questions to the material covered in the course.Maybe other people are much smarter than I am, but this source was a soul and time killer for me.",1
41284,"For someone who is not familiar with inferential statistics, this course is too compact. I lost the overall picture: it seems that a dozend methods were introduced, but I failed to understand under which preconditions each method is deployable. I am confused.",1
41291,"the content is too rich, and the explanation is too little. The no-feedback exam is misleading, difficult to pass. The course staff is not that helpful.",1
41297,"Hopelessly fast, compared to the excellent Basic Statistics by the same team. I gave up in week 1.",1
41299,A couple of results in Q1 directly contradict the theory. Course is quite unreliable.,1
41349,Paying for course just to learn how to loop and make if else statements... I don't think this is the best way to learn java!,1
41355,Use of Duke own specialised librarie ~ not the best way of learning progamming for the real world.,1
41385,Poorly designed and explained. You do not really gain much knowledge from this course.I would not recommend my friends and basically others to take this course. There are far better courses out there for much cheaper prices.,1
41390,"If you are a real beginner like me (having zero or little programming knowledge) and your time is limited, I think this course (or the specialisation) is not suitable for you. The assignments and quizzes are very time consuming. One week I spent literally 30+ hours writing and debugging codes for just one quiz.",1
41392,"This course is not suitable for beginners at all, everything basic is skipped. Highly not recommended",1
41398,"The course is too boring, I am not sure if it is because of the language or the lectures.",1
41413,"Use very specific environment that cannot be used in practice in the the Real World.For a much better course, use UC San Diego versions.",1
41414,"Does very little to actually help you learn JAVA. Explains nothing about why the language works as it does.. Also it insists on you using their libraries and programming environments. You spend perhaps 20% of your time actually practicing coding, and the rest is wasted in libraries you will never use again. Such a waste",1
41422,"Teaches you Java in a ""toy"" environment (Blue Jay) would be helpful to learn Java in Eclipse or another IDE that you would normally work in.",1
41447,"This is a good Java Tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBWX97e1E9g&list=PLE7E8B7F4856C9B19I followed two videos and I'm learning in my way.I left the course because the ammount of time required was too high. For example, for one part of an exercise I spent a total of 12 hours distributed in 3 days. For the other part of the exercise I spent 1 hour. Also, in the part one, the last exercise was tremendouly difficult for begginers and for someone (my case) that know one language.You are making people hate Java. This is not for begginers. I have to say that the part of codepen and HTML was great.Fortunatelly, I didn't pay. But I think that paying for this course is a waste of money. I had a good experience in other Coursera programming course: ""An Introduction to Interactive Programming in Python"" of Rice Unviersity. The examples were awesome and the tests were reasonable, quite the opposite to this course.Also, Eclipse is so much better than BlueJ in many ways, also into learning...And there's more things that must be improved, but no time and no money.I'm very dissapointed to this course and Duke Univeristy.",1
41459,My expectations were different,1
41460,The course is just terrible.It leaves an impression of being unfinished. There's a lot of knowledge missed out from lectures while being expected from the student in the quizzes.Lecturers themselves have a very vague understanding of how java works and how to code in real life. What they say in some lectures is very misleading and gives either false or just insufficient understanding of certain mechanisms.The examples are overcomplicated. They demand a full concentration on domain knowledge rather than on programming itself.,1
41467,"Poor, very poor course, worse course structure. Instructor hasn't put any thoughts in how they should strucutre this course.Cover no basics, assumes lots of thing and term this course as beginner for Java where actually there is no Java taught.",1
41480,"They push the University of Maryland way too much, the book and the videos have much of the same content. The book that you buy is written by the professor who runs the course which I do not agree with. The book could be more direct in how it gives you the lessons.",1
41482,You guys are just trying to sell your book.,1
41625,I havent been able to use C # in my PC so the course became useless,1
41648,For people who don't know programming at all only.,1
41664,Do not take this course unless you have previous C# coding experience. It is most definitely not for beginners.,1
41682,"The course is too complicated. Also this programm isnt working as good as it should. I got so many failures, which I had to look for by myself. Also it isnt well explained! I almost didnt understand anything! Also some data persons, i knew, didn't understand that either. They never worked with something like that!",1
41708,"Unfortunately, this is one the worst paid courses I've taken on Coursera. The material is very brief, the assignments are poorly explained and structured. As with all the other sections in this specialization, there is no feedback for professor or TAs, which is very-very frustrating.",1
41720,"Videos were not ellaborative, examples sparse and were not edited to completion. After months of this course repeatedly being delayed we see a complete failure with 'Information Design', both in course and in practice.I was very dissapointed with this course and the time-wasting assignments. I have enjoyed the courses leading up to this one, but this course was obviously rushed and poorly planned.",1
41727,Has been postponed for months and it's still only available for preview,1
41753,A very simplistic and chaotic course. Explanations are all over the place.BlueJ is probably the worst IDE I have ever seen and I have been a programmer for about 8 years.There are far better courses. I would not recommend this course at all.,1
41776,"thanks for the course, but-your quizzes is real pain, some random variable could cause wrong result-your should follow how it is implemented in lectures in stupid way, like ""efficient"" way when you build hash map N^2 instead of N-bluej sucks you make a lot of clicks to run method, use some decent IDE like eclipse or idea",1
41818,"The first segment on why ""Digital Changes Everything"" is good background but the rest was too abstract for me with nothing I could really take away and practice.",1
41900,"This course was required by my director, but it is not for those who have no background in law (which was the case for the group of us at CDC who were required to take this). It was very difficult to iuinderstand and I did not think it was a ""beginner's course for no",1
41978,"Material is really interesting and helpful, but a lot of bugs in video productions.",1
42047,"The course is misrepresented as infographics for all. It is really infographics for journalists WITH experience in Adobe Illustrator. There is no chance that anyone walking into the course with zero experience in AI can pass. No chance, period!The final project grading is unfair & ridiculous. The scoring is ""not good"", ""good"", ""excellent"". Here's the thing... scoring ""good"" equals a fail in the project and, therefore, a fail in the course. Your classmates with experience in adobe are scoring you based upon the instructors ""excellent"" examples. Not realistic at all.I would also point out that the course is excellent for journalists but completely useless for those of us in the business world. Under no circumstances would we use journalistic-style infographics in the business world. Having worked for multiple Fortune 500's, this style would NEVER fly in the business world. I wish I had known before I signed up. I would never have wasted the hours, energy or money.",1
42066,"Well, while I felt really frustrated after having played ALL of this course videos, I have first put very negative comments here for its reviewing. I have then been kindly asked to reconsider my comments under the light of the usefulness of this course to some audience. For sure, it might be that I was not of the attended audience. And I still think that this course was of no interest to me - this is the reason why I'm still pleased not to have paid for its useless certificate. Nevertheless, this course might be of interest for some students. This is definitively true. So, let me suggest a new title for it: ""Design and Make Infographics for the Dummies"". Because that's it! This course is definitively perfect for the ones who know nothing about Infographics and they might enjoy it. Finally, I shall neither modify nor remove my previous comments on the examples used by the author.Please notice that Coursera still gets all my confidence about the usefulness and the quality of their proposed courses. For instance, just have a look to the course ""Machine Learning"" of one of its co-founders, Andrew Ng.------------------------------------My previous comments here below:For sure I was not the correct audience for this course. But nothing useful to be learned in here. Karl Gude is too much speaking of what he has formerly done, which is of only interest to him. I dislike the examples he uses : violence, sex, illness, accidents, weapons, war, drugs - and fruits, ok. Are these the only topics of interest to him? Finally, it appears that the $45 certificate does not worth it. I'm pleased not to have paid for it. And I definitively not recommend this course. Waste of time if not even waste of money.",1
42074,"I quit this course in the 4th week and I hope my following points are seen as constructive and help the owners to improve the experience.- On the plus side this course presents some nice correlations between bible and Babylonion sources.- Quizzes are too hard. If you miss a single piece of information, you can't complete it due to a 4-out-of-8 selection question every week which you HAVE to answer correctly. After reviewing all videos of week 4 twice, I quit.- Lectures often lack a continuous thread to follow. Back and forward jumps in time are common. Timelines at the end sometimes help, but are shown too late.- The forum is abandoned! To the point of time there are three (!) posts in the forum and none of the forum operators. No one is taking care of it.- The lecturer's English is not good, but understandable. Sometimes with unusual choice of words.",1
42082,"Extremely badly organized, messy, and technical",1
42084,i can't understand what he talk about. need a sub.,1
42132,This is ok and I enjoyed the humour and feeble running gags in the lectures.But it doesn't justify the rip-off pricing at all.,1
42234,"I've just wasted 2 hours going through repetitions of what I'll learn, but not actually learning anything. Why is it called free, if I can't submit answers to quizzes unless I upgrade first!I now have an adverse reaction towards that course that it doesn't really have much content to it, and I'm not the least eager to upgrade. Thank you very much!",1
42247,not very dynamic,1
42252,I really did not understand this course. There was way too much jargon.,1
42263,"The course are fantastic but 3 month HARD WORKING to earn a ""cheap"" certificate that looks false :( I cannot present it to my company",1
42267,Very bad Because you need 3 persons to evaluate you every week and often this persons is not educated or gives a score zero for all . So having to re-course or leaving without convincing reason,1
42278,"I am giving 1 star to this MOOC because giving 0 is not an option.The ""savoir relier protocol"" might be efficient when taught face to face in a classroom but as a MOOC it is a massive waste of time and money (I paid for the capstone project and I'm feeling robbed).I learnt absolutely nothing.This MOOC is a major disappointment from a school such as HEC.",1
42290,All assignments giving you more insight on your personality had to be purchased. I did not really feel like a free course .... too,1
42293,"Underwhelmed. If this had been a free course I might have gone up to two stars, but I probably wouldn't have finished.This course attempts to take complex social awareness and patterns and reduce them to an understandable set of skills to be practiced... but it fails. I find it to be full of new-age dreamy ramblings that do not really help in the real world.Leadership is influence, which comes as a mixture of experience and intention. This course seems to discount experience in favour of ""sense"", used in this context as a poorly-translated summing up of the physical senses and their analysis.This course requires you to create an intimate written self-portrait, which you then find yourself sharing with a stranger and comparing. The exercise is interesting, and a lot of students have bought into the premise that this is a ""genuine conversation"" and allows them to explore their ability to know another person. I am the heretic in the room: I think the student wish to appear intelligent to their peers and the emperor is in fact shamefully unclad. If this is what the world considers a ""genuine"" conversation then the world is a shallower place than I had thought.This course, unfortunately, over-promises and under-delivers, and I am not in the least tempted to take the next one in the series. A good concept, but poorly planned, poorly translated, and poorly executed. Valerie clearly understands her topic but the summarizing of it for this framework is not a success.",1
42325,I just started the course and I'm going to stop this course right away. In my opinion showing Hitler as an appropriate leader is not the course I want to visit! I do not upport any racist mindset.,1
42348,"This course really doesn't offer anything substantial in a practical sense. It has the feel of some sort of odd ""New Age"" repackaging of things already obvious to anyone with even a modicum of leadership ability. This is the first Coursera course that I have ever wanted to rate zero stars.",1
42401,"I found the content and the presenters much less engaging than in ""Developing Innovative Ideas for New Companies: The First Step in Entrepreneurship"". The exams were so easy that I could pass them at 100% without watching most of the videos. I really don't have the feeling that I learned much that would help me in getting ""From Idea to Marketplace"". Overall disappointing for a paid course.",1
42411,"It's a second edition of this course. I think that this edition is absolutely useless. Several old mans read subtitles from obsolete books under the camera. No real-life examples, no practice, just obvious things and pure theory from dawn of dinosaurs. 1 star for Ostervalder's business model canvas, the real mark of this course is 0 stars. Where is the first edition of this course with original lectures of Tom Mierzwa? I feel robbed for 49$.",1
42440,"Very cursory and doesn't get into analysis about why things are the way they are. This course just explains who the actors, their roles and environment they operate in. It would have been much more interesting and useful to learn the why.",1
42644,"To be honest, there are no techniques here that cannot be found in many other places. The only difference is that they explain the science behind the techniques, which in terms of practical application is not very useful at all.",1
43124,"Dear Professors/Instructors/TAs/moderators/coders:It is very good for you to start your work in a very early time! BUT it is so rude to send emails/notifications/greetings/reminders to me in a very early/late time (e.g., 7AM, 10PM). During that moment, I was waked up frequently by your emails which do NOT include a big deal.",1
43410,Boring,1
43758,its boring,1
43828,Videos aren't of good quality and the tools aren't concrete enough to be useful. There is not enough material. I hope they will improve it because the subject is interesting.,1
43993,Filled with redundant balderdash and extremely dumbed-down and slow-paced. Offends the learner.,1
44611,"This is definitely a course for someone that has finished a higher degree. if you've done that, there's a very big change that you already know about 90%-95% of the techniques presented in thous course.",1
44680,boring,1
44956,waste of time,1
45545,This course did not motivate me at all. Videos where mainly repetitive and the questions seemed to be there to serve no purpose.,1
46562,"This course tells you to use a timer while studying without the TV on and to avoid procrastination. It also stresses review while learning. This isn't anything new. The course discusses diffuse and focused modes. Diffuse modes are described as being as important as focused modes. Running, day dreaming and sleep can help enter diffuse modes and integrate focused learning. Save you time and skip this course.",1
47010,"Practical tips are few, and neuroscience is not the title of the course, but is widely discussed. The title implies ""Tools for learning"" but I didn't get anything useful out of this course.",1
47119,Only part 3 was partly interesting and usefull. All the rest is vain.,1
48407,"the weekly quiz are premium only now? well now i don't need to review other's work, since calification is already broken, so ty. Just close the free enroll already, make ppl life easy. I have to say goodbye Rice now.ps: worse part is i really enjoyed the last time i was here. Now i feel an asshole for believing on this shit.",1
48424,joe warren ur better than this,1
48460,"I am very disapointed about this course. This course is more about how programming, then teaching about programming in python. The lecture is too long and information value is very low. In my opinion, this course is for somebody who never programming, it is not depend in which language. If you wont to know how if, for, functions works, what is variable etc, then this is the right place where to learn this basics.",1
48492,not upto the mark.Not meant for intelligent students,1
48519,"Only able to audit the class, no longer able to take quizzes and tests. I recommend the Python classes from Michigan over these if you are looking to avoid paying for old material.",1
48522,"I wouldn't give a star for this course; materials are prosaic (wordy); professors have not designed a truly high-tech course with automated grading; they want peers to grade each other - I don't like this euphemism, which is equivalent to the blind leading the blind; I do not want to spend my energy correcting other peoples' programming assignments; I want to spend the time thinking about programming and working on my own programs - the concept of collaboration is false - everyone wants to develop their own stuff not share with others so the premise of the course is inaccurate; also, the course has many long-winded texts of little use to the student; this is a course more about indoctrination in a legacy system than it is a course to liberate the mind through computers; while the content is interesting I am completely turned off by the amount of time I have to devote to commenting on other peoples' stuff - I am not a teacher - that is the teacher's job not my job - also, I do not like the condescension and clownishness of the profs in this course - I do not need to be entertained and all the talk about Monty Python, one of the corniest programs on TV trivializes the material - a no-nonsense, MIT type course is preferable - this is a course that I would avoid from the logistical perspective, although I will follow the material side of the course because it has substantial content and that includes the specialization - hello teachers in the course - automate the grading and remove all of the peer evaluations and start offering authentic instruction, not lazy instruction of students teaching students - the approach is typical of all legacy-oriented courses - the same goes for the Severance course at the University of Michigan - if the Rice course is supposed to instill interest in Rice University, this offering turns me away from Rice because one realizes that Rice is too legacy-oriented in its approach, same old, same old.",1
48537,"huge waste of time, they will give you very little information and what is expected for you to be able to do with that information is astronomical, you will never learn any of the details of how computing works, how functions work, the mechanism behind these computations, or anything. To give you an example, you will first watch a horribly made video on boolean logic, alter going to youtube to get a better explanation of 'And', 'or' , and 'not', you'll see an example done with If, else, and elif, then be asked to do homework problems using and, or, not. This huge gap between the information given, and the information you are expected to know to solve the problems they give you is too large, I found differential equations easier than this",1
48547,"just some basic knowledge, most of the knowledge is not expanded or deep introduced.",1
48632,"The given introduction didn't help me to figure out how the grading system will look like. There are no assignments to submit, only online group works, which is not organised well at all. There are too many threads and the it's not at all clear what to write about. Apparently I should write about certain cases, but I couldn't find the content of the case. There is no proper introduction, work overview or anything. Very dissapointing.",1
48697,"Most video's are spoken in a sort of 'Franglais' that is barely understandable, very annoying.",1
48700,Not what expected ...,1
48709,Not professional at all!,1
48715,"It is a great effort to try to explain writing an academic paper. I appreciate it. And unfortunately, these guys have an awful English accent. It is almost impossible to understand. Moreover, their sentences are so long and complicated that makes it impossible to get it. Nice try but it doesn't work :(Best regards,Dr. Furkan",1
48721,very basic course. I would only recommend this if you are just starting your PhD program and you have no idea how the writing process works,1
48733,"I am very disappointed with this course I had to wait too long on grading, first time I got not naff points then I had to wait for about few months on grading. I will not take capstone for this course because I suppose I would wait about a few years on grading. This course has to change grading process because has no adequate number of students for peer review.",1
48913,"The Course is acceptable, however, it should be called, Introduction to VoIP communication or Developing VoIP applications rather than its current title.Assignments are either super easy or never have a right answerPersonally, I will not recommend this course for other who want to understand IoT",1
48922,The female presenter's speed of speech is so slow it's almost hard to concentrate on.The questions where answers need to be filled in are so stupid that you can fill in any random letters or punctuations and it'll count as pass.Like the comics!,1
49036,"I'm dropping out of a specialisation I paid for because the quality of the materials is really low, and the presentation is very similar. I don't want to discourage the presenters, but this is not the level I expected.",1
49043,It looks like a youtube review and not a real course,1
49044,many outdated instructionsinexperienced tutors who almost never explain why things are done in a certain way,1
49274,"too fast paced, not suited for absolute beginners. first week takes alone about 3 weeks to complete and master",1
49428,"Way to basics, just to much explication but nothing actually to implement or to do.",1
49442,"I was so excited for this course, but IT failed miserably. I am a complete newbie, I didn't know one thing about IoT before engaging in this course. I gave it one star due to actually learning a small something IN SPITE of the fact the prof is extremely inarticulate. The course is extremely short and vague. There was no care in detail or discussion or presentation. There's no forum to ask questions or to even start or engage in a discussion.",1
49526,"A course graded only by your peers ! what's the point ? Well the peers that graded my answers are not qualified to grade my work, useless, wast of time grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.",1
49547,Not good- weak lecturer- repeats himself endlessly- waste of time,1
49567,Stunning waste of time. There is nothing of substance.,1
49622,"got to pay, but besides that it's more about him talking less learning about anything",1
49654,"Would not let me leave course after signing up. Due to family issues, I could not continue, but due to some weird policy, after purchasing this class, I could not drop. (Still can't)",1
49656,The peer review is a bad bad idea.,1
49730,"Won't teach anything to anyone with the most basic computer science background and knowledge.The most useless assignments in any Coursera course I've ever seen, that require no useful (or any) knowledge to complete.",1
49743,"No forum, what are you thinking!",1
49790,till week 2 i think there is no useful information till now,1
49808,The peer reviewed assignments in this course are discriminatory towards people with learning disabilities. Coursera is unwilling to provide any accommodation to relieve this discrimination.,1
49812,Too much introduction,1
49843,This is a very bad course I wouldn't recommend it to anyone as it doesn't concern to any coding.,1
50027,"The instructors may be knowledgeable, but they had no knack for teaching.",1
50039,10/10 would program again,1
50052,"Not for beginners unless you are willing to invest a significant amount of time with outside sources, beyond what is stated as needed to complete the course. disappointing.",1
50246,Class was boring and the professor wasn't inspired nor inspiring.,1
50305,"Study material DOES NOT cover tested material appropriately. For those quizzes I took, I ended up doing them by trial and error. Took one of them seven times just changing answers. Quiz 3 is so ambiguous that I am giving up.",1
50311,"The irony of the fact that a course that was meant to teach how to appropriate evaluate adult learners was full of quizzes that were riddled with ""guess what I'm thinking"" short answer questions and multiple choice questions with > or < 1 correct answer was not lost on me. I ended up leaving the course during week three after issues with a quiz that was described in the forums as ""impossible."" It's too bad - the course description was very promising.",1
50387,"NOTHING like described, NOT EASY for non native english speakers as describedextremely misleading..",1
50563,did not like the course at all. That is why I decided to discontinue the course.,1
50682,"not too good ,,because in assignments session they doesnt know what the right ans is, as in first assignment ,the ques is about circumference of circle as in google the exact ans is what they wronged it",1
50684,"Few explanations, no feedback after doing things wrong.",1
50690,"This requires a high level understanding of maths (highest high school level) especially SI, and exponents. It is not suitable for people with no background in maths or physics",1
50801,This course is just pulling the knowledge without basic logic. I have no idea what I have learned.,1
50817,"Very shallow coverage, doesnt have the scope to be an entire Course!",1
50818,nothing helpful,1
50819,"I can't complete the course without passing the graded content, but I can't complete the graded content unless I pay money and upgrade. Not the purpose of thes courses.",1
50830,It was too basic for me.,1
50872,"Content is very basic. I believe this can be useful for school graduates, but if you have at least a couple years of hands-on experience, you shouldn't find anything new.",1
50894,"Not really useful as course, but only as introduction to other materials... feels more like an ad than a real course",1
50902,"This is a very old fashion way of looking at development and developers. Where developers are considered resources and minions that need to follow orders. Modern development techniques value developers and allow them to be much more active players. Product Manager is not a MANAGER but a facilitator. This course describes the view that developers are loose canons that need to be managed and that upfront planning and estimation are the right path. I do not agree at all with this view.Should you happen to agree with this view, the Course is well explained and presented well.",1
50919,"Mostly a bunch of unsubstantiated and dogmatic cliches flaunted around. The ""Agile"" buzzword in its best and most ""religious"" form.",1
50962,"Course title is misleading. It is actually a course on Managing Agile Software development, not Product management.There is common understanding in active product management community that major focus for product manager is market. Market is not mentioned in this course at all.What requirements and schedule, guys??? Current product management is all about hypotheses, A/B testing, customer development, experiments, lean UX, etc.You completely missing the point.Still, this course can be a good one for those who want to start Managing agile software development.",1
50968,"Difference between a Software Project and a Software Product - of course it is defined by convention, but it is there and is pretty generally understood. Typical software projects are bespoke applications developed for the use of one organization and typically automates a business process. A S/w product, on the other hand, is built and sold to a range of users in the target group, who can be individuals to large organizations. This course does not seem to address any of the issues faced by a S/w Product Manager. I think this course completely misses the point.",1
51020,Too general course. Didn't learn much from it.,1
51021,"poorly constructed, too simplistic and too slow",1
51028,Not holding my interest. Sorry!,1
51065,"I was denied completion of this course because a fellow course taker felt the need to ""grade"" unfairly. I suggest all ""peers"" keep in mind we are here to learn not to be judge so critically. The spirit of the course was destroyed by a thoughtless action. If you wish to be critical that's fine but at least have the courage to leave feedback for me to review. Coward.",1
51167,"The quality of the presentation is very low, and way below the quality in other courses. The assignments are very poorly designed. This is not a subjective personal experience. This is based on discussions with other learners in the forum who have expressed disappointment and frustration.",1
51169,"I wrote some indepth feedback, but par for the course, I can't save it - either here or on the discussion board. Nothing obscene, but certainly some major frustration with format, inconsistencies in scoring and format, information not reviewed in the course on some of the quizzes, the fact that Coursera keeps trying to sell me the specialty, the lack of ANY moderator on the discussion board to provide assistance...and can go on with the technical issues to but I won't!",1
51212,"You know when u see a bunch of good reviews of a restaurant and then go there and the food is terrible, the place is awful and the waiters are the worst?Well, same here:. class structure is messy. communication skills are poor.. i know this is not a design course but the examples shown in html are so bad u think u are watching a course from 2002.. the teacher says ""frustrating"" some many times, and uses so much negative word towards coding and html... maybe she hopes not desencoraje students by empathy but end up doing the exact opposite.i would not recommend this course, not to newbies, not to oldies, not to anyone searching to have a good learning experience.Finishing this course was painfull and i only did it because i promised myself not to abandond it.",1
51426,"This has to be the poorest educational experience Ive ever had. Virtually nothing is explained. The instructor says time & time again that she's not going to bother to explain in detail and that we should go out & explore all these free resources if we want to learn. SO WHY DID I PAY FOR THIS CLASS? Honestly, save your money. This is nothing but a rip-off and I am shocked that an institution like U of M would allow such a sloppy, lazy product to be out there under its brand.To make matters worse, we are instructed time & time again to go out onto the discussion board and ask for help when she doesn't want to bother explaining a concept.1. Everyone else taking this class is confused too - how could they possibly be of any help to me?2. The staff who comes onto the boards are just about as rude & unhelpful as any I've ever seen. They literally say ""well, did you WATCH the lecture?"" Ummm- yes I did & it directed me to come here for help.I feel duped. This is a scam and I can only say I am sorry I paid my money for this. If you really want to learn CSS, get yourself a good book on the subject and/or utilize the free material out on the internet. This will absolutely waste hours of your time and way too much of your money for what they are providing.",1
51571,Very broad instruction but very picky quizzes. Spent more time frustrated with trick questions on quizzes than actually learning something.,1
51607,"Major issues with the tests not accepting Chinese or pinyin text which they failed to respond to, despite multiple complaints.",1
51616,"Despite being someone with spoken Mandarin ability, I have decided to stop taking this course due to the new vocabulary not being explicitly described or explained in much detail. The basic grammar is also skipped over in explanation.",1
51619,The worst that I have taken so far... please change the teacher or re-do the materials explaining the concepts more!.Or at least give more extra material to understand the concepts better.,1
51696,most of it you can't do unless you pay for it. - not sure I can even click 'complete' for the course. so not really a MOOC. - no option for collaboration.Videos had useful content about 50% of the.Week 4 resources was by far the best and most useful.,1
51787,Patronising and very poor in content.,1
52131,"It's unbelievable is how many way you can rephrase the same idea over and over again, without making any progress in something new.",1
52136,The teacher's voice on first lessons are so flat and plain that is very boring to listen them. I left the course,1
52153,Could not get to the fourth course and was asked to pay for it twice.,1
52202,Ended up not being able to take the rest of the courses I paid for because Coursera kept pushing it back... Start date after start date moved ....,1
52339,waste of time and money,1
52358,Bad content and instructor. no logistic in place. if you are planning to pay to get certificate. I would suggest look else where. my $279 are stuck in here and they don't reply to forum posts.,1
52362,"Definitely they can do a much better job, despite there're many improvements compared to the first course. However, the introduction is lack of logic, and I still find myself lacking of systematic command of the material towards the end of this session. Kind of disappointed.",1
52368,"Where is the actual information ,are some parts missing , are they payed ? useless",1
52377,Horribly designed and developed. Jack Wu may be an expert but he does not know how to teach others.,1
52397,"The class format -- only quizzes during most weeks, no programming work, then ending with a *huge* programming assignment -- is really poor pedagogical technique. If you're going to teach programming, have programming assignments *every* *week*, instead of dropping a massive assignment at the very end of the course.",1
52523,There was no engagement between the course instructors and students at all. It felt like students were running the whole show and discussion forums.,1
52575,"I feel robbed. I did not get any feedback on my work. Only a classmate gave their ok ""yes, there is something written"".I did not follow the course to get a ""certificate"" but to learn and to revceive feedback. If you don't have a special purpose for the certificate - don't pay a cent for this.",1
52638,Poorly designed and explained. You do not really gain much knowledge from this course.I would not recommend my friends and basically others to take this course. There are far better courses out there for much cheaper prices.,1
52654,Not really useful ~ I would like to email in a PDF of my comments covering this course and the second course in this series,1
52683,"I have met with nothing but frustration with this course. Though the lectures are understandable, but the readings are comparable but unrelated to the material in the lectures. I also had no kind of communication with instructors, TAs, or other student for help. It is ridiculous that there is NO feedback forums, and this seems to be the only course that handles it that way. If this an institutional decision to not have feedback, it seems that these instructors and/or the University of California, Irvine do not care to help students. I would not recommend this to anyone!",1
52757,"I am really sorry that a course with such a good content is ruined by the unrealistic assignement of week 4. That assignment will at least take 6 weeks to do and that should naturally lead to course length of 10 or 11 weeks which would be realistic. So if you pay money for it, start the course and do it till week 4, than pause and do the assignment and restart at a later date in order to comply to the necessary tasks. The creators of this course did not react to our cries of help within a week. Poor support from them - the coursera team tried to help but obviously in vain. What I learnt for future courses: I will look into the detail of every assingment before starting and paying. Unfortunately in some courses you can´t even look into the assignments when you haven´t paid. This should be changed. Because I consider it a trick to lure someone into an interesting course and then making it impossible to finish it in the given timeframe. Not being able to see what will be demanded prior to paying may also be a coursera policy problem. So maybe there is a better platform than coursera that lets you to be clear of what is ahead of you. For a learner this is of great value: honesty, transparency and realistic information - because I have to plan and schedule how much time I can take for learning!",1
52758,"the course is designed in a way you can not accomplished or get certificate on the proposed timeframe. It was very disappointing to pay for certification and not be able to get it due to issues with the course developers ( a lack of understanding of how coursera works, it's clear they did not care to adapt to a 5 week course) and peer reviewed activities proposed that took over 6 weeks to get done. (further to the course timeframe) The assistance from developers was too poor and never sought to find solutions, which is very strange in a course for coaching. Not the mention video quality that is scary, I could not watch the videos, and preferred to study by reading the transcriptions.",1
52776,Not as advertized and way too much peer rating stuff--we do all the work the instructor does little or none--too much peer rating stuff which I despise. And there seems to be no way to un-enroll.,1
52795,nothing i can say that made me jump for joy. i fell asleep half the time.,1
52810,"Hi!just a terrible course, honestly. couldn't understand a little what was the message you wanted to pass on students.couldn't stand more than a week of this course.Apologies for being over-rude",1
52830,"Really I haven't seen a course with slides till now,No one will be interested to take a course like this, with some slides to read from.",1
52832,"The course uses a clunky presentation software. Worse than Power Point. Some sections only have one slide and it takes longer to access the slide than it does to read it. There is talk about a book, but I didn't find one within the course. I didn't get past the second section. I figured if the rest of the course was the same, I'd be better off teaching myself with a text book.",1
52835,The use of external tool for no good reason + the lack of written summary makes the course really hard to follow.,1
52846,Week 4 does not give enough explanation or extra resources and makes it unable to complete the exercises.,1
52847,"probably a very interesting course, but the way of teaching looks very indigestible... no video and no real explanation or examples.",1
52850,"Personally, I strongly doubt that putting a bunch of slides and a few auto-graded exercises is the best way to learn about logic. Why then Stanford University doesn't just email his students this material and let them work on their own instead of doing lectures?I don't see the added value at all. Apart from being able to discuss the topic in the forum with other online students, what's the advantage in comparison to buying a book and doing the exercises there?This course to me started off with the wrong foot. No info on the starting date of the course until the end of September, when instead the course was supposed to start at the beginning of the month. And now the complete absence of videos. This to me seems more like a fuck up on the side of Coursera, which didn't find an agreement with Stanford University so no material had been produced until now. Then, in order not to completely ruin its reputation, Coursera put a bunch of slides calling it an online course and expecting people to buy this lie.I might be wrong and this could be only my theory and nothing else, however, I won't recommend Coursera to anyone after this. Very bad feedback so far, and the funny thing is that I had big expectations before the start.Hope this will be taken as constructive feedback and not as a complaint.",1
52852,"While the content of this course is interesting and well-structured, the way it's presented on Coursera has major problems.As it stands, this is not really a Coursera course; it's simply a Coursera wrapper around some links to a third-party website. All of the things that make Coursera valuable - videos with inline quizzes, ability to download content, the exam format, peer assessment - are missing. In fact, having Coursera as a wrapper actually makes it more difficult to use, because additional clicks are required to access any resource, and nothing is accessible offline. If this course is to be offered on Coursera, it needs major rework to take advantage of the platform.This is a real shame, because there is some great content here and obviously a lot of care has been taken to structure it carefully for the original Stanford course. For that reason, recommend using the Stanford web site directly.",1
52860,"The teacher just read the PowerPoint,and his voice makes my sleepy.",1
52958,Too simple to be realistic,1
53363,"Sucks....The audio quality sucks, the video quality is also miserable. The topic is good though.",1
54202,"This is an extremely basic course. Machine learning is built on mathematics, yet this course treats mathematics as a mysterious monster to be avoided at all costs, which unfortunately left this student feeling frustrated and patronized. So much time is wasted in the videos with arduous explanations of trivialities, and so little taken up with the imparting of meaningful knowledge, that in the end I abandoned the videos altogether. The quizes were basic (largely based on recall of, rather than application of knowledge), as were the programming assignments (nearly all of which were spoon-fed, with the tasks sometimes being simple as multiplying two matrices together).If you are serious about machine learning and comfortable with mathematics (e.g. elementary linear algebra and probability), do yourself a favour and take Geoff Hinton's Neural Networks course instead, which is far more interesting and doesn't shy away from serious explanations of the mathematics of the underlying models.",1
54561,"I would rename this course as Programming Octave with Application to Machine Learning rather that Machine Learning. Once you start the course you will have to focus on Octave rather than on ML topics if you want to do programming exercises. There is no degree of freedom in programming. You are provided with a lot of weird Octave codes which you will have to complete instead of writing yourself from scratch. More than 50% of my time was spent in order to learn Octave and understand (guess!!!!) Octave codes.So, if you really want to learn ML and try it in practice this course is not for you. However, you could just watch the videos whose level is not more that elementary introduction to ML.",1
55132,I am trying from last 5 days to start my enrolled course but error message is displaying Everytime. Kindly solve my problem.,1
56617,Very basic and superficial course. Apologies each time derivatives need to be used.,1
56662,"Professor didn't do a good job on explaining the theory. He moves too fast. This should improve so that student who has less/weak knowledge of Math can pass the quiz. If you are not a Math student, don't take this class. I was hoping to learn about how to program to control the machine/robot but it turns out that this is more focusing on the theory instead. I would recommend to take another course of ML/Big Data from UCI instead.",1
57228,"Outdated material, nightmare to submit assignments. Badly needs to be updated.",1
57233,"only theory no practice. I don't need math at this point as I don't know even how to build simple machine learning program. Programming assignments come with no explanation. It is not possible to finish this course without learning from other sources on the web, materials attached to this course are not enough to understand the subject. I have trouble understanding what the teacher is trying to teach from the very beginning of course.",1
57494,Hard and dry,1
58050,"There are too many mistakes and misleading statements made in the course material. There were a lot difficulties with submitting assignments in order to move forward in the course. I had to give up because I don't have time to be bogged down like this.The students' comments and discussion would be useful if they can be accessed from within each lesson. I can't make heads or tails of what the discussions were referring to, when they are all clumped together at the course web site instead.",1
58438,"The course may be great, but the sound of the video is really terrible, this is a big problem for me and possibly to other users, at the point where I decided to stop watching.Please do something about it !",1
58781,"The exercises lead you to the edge of a cliff, then push you off. No guidance. Good luck if you don't already know linear algebra, matrix math, and matlab. I'll be looking elsewhere to learn about Machine Learning. Glad I didn't pay for this course!",1
58797,"However good the material and lectures may be, the use of an outdated version of Octave (which is not Mac-friendly and exceedingly brittle, to the extent where the supplied code requires manual patching in Windows and Linux) is a complete turn-off and makes it nearly impossible to complete the assignments on time unless you're prepared to spend at least twice as much time debugging your setup as doing the actual assignments.I'll come back when this is done with R or Python.",1
59130,"Been asked to re-take all assignments *after* paying for a certificate! I wil never pay for a Coursera course again, and I would not recommend my friends to do so",1
59155,The course is ok but the certification procedure is a mess!No statement of accomplishment and you have to retake all the assignments if you want the certificate and had not been verified ....,1
59418,Why dont you open week2 and rest of the weeks ?? Why the hell are you blocking my learning until ???,1
59489,"The course is more an exercise in flexing Ivy vernacular than it is actually teaching. The learning curve is too steep to be useful to the majority of potential registrants. You're interested in this course either to (a) learn something about an exciting and ever changing field and/or (b) to have the Stanford logo on your LinkedIn profile. In both cases, move on. The curve is far too steep to be useful or to merit the countless additional hours of background learning the course should have done to bridge the gap.",1
59690,"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.",1
60075,I'm not installing anything. Completely app/cloud-based or forget it. Need to do to the teaching of machine learning what ALEKS is doing to the teaching of mathematics.,1
60465,This class was not useful for me. The professor talked about the idea of data analysis without ever discussing how to actually perform data analysis.,1
60493,Good course but not good from coursera to not give honor certificate like it used to give.edx still gives..very disappointed with coursera.,1
60517,Very disappointed in this course. Light on content and heavy (especially in week 3) on political bias towards one political persuasion. Highly biased and controversial statements by those in videos are taken as fact without any attempt to question it. I expected a course to talk about elections and apply it to 2016. Instead what is here is a course that not so subtly seems to have an agenda. Not good for academic discourse. I believe this is my first negative review in my 3(?) or so years on Coursera.,1
60531,"Rather uninteresting presentation. I found it hard to become interested in the course or Kierkegaard after having high hopes of truly enjoying it. The best parts of the lectures were when the instructor was taped at venues pertinent to the course. The peer reviewers were not always fair, in my opinion. I'd spend my time elsewhere, personally, especially since this course was something for my own personal edification and not a requirement.",1
60584,Lousy course.....boring teacher,1
60834,"Sadly, this course is at the high school level at the most. Very disappointing to see it listet here as a university course.",1
60857,Very low material not enough examples ( full emails),1
60862,"You can't do the assignments unless you pay the subscription. The founding idea of MOOCs was to make education more accesible. How do you test your knowledge if you can't submit assignments? I understand paying for a certificate, but I don't want the certificate.",1
60864,Way too elementary.,1
60945,"Overall this course was very shallow and only touched the surface on the matters discussed. The professors refrained to only mention a few cases of how companies dealt with certain matters rather than provide the tools used in order to reach those decisions. Also, the title of this course barely matches the expectation one has about the content",1
60946,"Huge backlog of assignments from other sessions of the course that are waiting for peer reviews makes it very difficult to get your own assignment peer reviewed, even if you submit before deadline. Course content is not substantiated with research. Assignment instructions and grading criteria are badly misaligned, which is probably why there is such a big backlog of old assignments from earlier sessions.The person responsible for the course should take the following actions:1) Aligning the grading criteria with the assignment instructions2) Clearing out the backlog of assignments that have not yet been peer reviewed. I estimate that there are 50-100 still pending review, many were submitted almost one year ago.",1
61140,"weather its an act of self-interests or not, I don't really care. fact is after viewing few videos into the starting point where the legit content should appear, I decided to stop; it is a waste of my time.he is either not teaching and providing the real solutions or he doesn't really know much; full of trash talk in generality, negativity on points of view, and outdated methodology that is not practical in the 21st century.I have proof to my review.",1
61237,"13 weeks long? This is basically his class syllabus transferred to a MOOC! The first video was a ridiculous waste of my time. The videography was totally unprofessional. Shaky camera, this long walk and football kicking with a brain on the football field??? The audio is horrible... use a mic. I signed up for a neuro course, not an advertisement of the campus. This guy needed an Instructional Designer to help him condense and build this course into something digestible. This is MOOC, not a college course. I am horribly disappointed at the quality. I needed an overview of the main components of Neuro Medical Science.",1
61245,"Peer reviewed assignments are a joke. Assignment was ""Not Verified"" which is not possible seeing how before you submit you have to verify assignment.",1
61247,"This capstone project is a bad joke and I'm gonna tell you why!First, ESSEC TAs were never available! We had to contact Coursera several times for weeks to get a simple yet not helpful reply from ESSEC. And it was too late for anything, really... Remember, the whole project lasts for 4 weeks only!Second, several documents required for the weekly assignments were missing! It's fair to say we were all free-styling (i.e. making wild assumptions) our ways through the entire capstone due to lack of necessary information.Third (and most importantly). most of the participants didn't have any basic business background whatsoever. Be prepared to get a bad grade from someone who's clueless about hotel business, not to mention revenue or demand management. That really makes you wonder how these people even passed the last three core courses....Forth, this capstone is great for those who just want to get a certificate for the sake of having a certificate. Did you notice those 4 or 5 star ratings with no written reviews? Yeah, they were probably trying to show their appreciation for the easy certificate. After all, it's easy to walk away with a decent grade when there's no one knows what's going on. ANYTHING GOES! However, if you are a serious learner who wants to actually learn something, run away from this capstone. You will be thanking me later.All in all, a horrible experience and I wish I could get those 4 weeks of my life back!",1
61354,Does not include latest developments in this industry,1
61449,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
61473,Very boring presentation of the material,1
61476,"Assignments were uninspired and some questions were weird. Also, this textbook is horrible, and is presented in a very inconvenient format (PDF-only, two book pages per page of PDF so you can't effectively read it on a phone).",1
61537,"Just following a text book, without an added value from the lectures.",1
61541,Awful teacher and explanation and material,1
61552,"This course is a total disappointment in comparison with all the other courses from this specialization.The quality of the course is very poor:- reading links are outdated and not available;- assignments are superficial;- tests consist of questions which do not make you think but make you memorize unnecessary numbers;- lectures are presented poorly. They are read from the screen and you feel that attitude. Very often they include videos from reading.The course feels like an outdated or a class for mentally defective: read about it, then we'll repeat the same in the lectures, then you'll pass the test with the same kind of questions, then we'll ask you to make an assignment, answering the question that has already been discussed three times once again. Do not bother to think, just repeat, because that's what necessary.I struggled to finish this course only because of the whole specialization and a great job which has been done by all the other professors.",1
61569,"Totally useless.1) Why is she speaking so so so slow? I put the playback rate at X 1,50 in order to be able to understand her.2) She is just making a summary in bullets of the readings that we are supposed to read anyway. Nothing new in the lectures.If it was not a part of the Specialization I would never follow that course, neither the other one taught by the same professor.",1
61570,The instructor is very bad. She made the lectures so boring with her lack of preparation that I switched to just reading the transcript. The assignments were lacking in case studies and were very textbooky. I could have skipped this course and simply read from the E-book. Tried to get a refund but its too late so I will have to force through this one and the next. I hope it doesn't adversely affected my grades as I have scored above 96% in the previous 3 courses in this specialisation. Very disappointed and frustrated. I came to Coursera to avoid teachers and teaching styles like this. This really shakes my confidence in Coursera for future courses. Im definitely not going to pay for any courses in the future.,1
61580,"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",1
61585,Professor is not engaging at all. Presentation skills are poor.,1
61594,There is insufficient peers to review. The content is mostly theory from the e-textbook.,1
61599,"This instructor is god-awful, I'm sorry to say. By the 3rd week, I stopped caring about this class, and my grade for that week definitely expresses my disinterest. I'm having to force myself to finish it. Has she ever taught a class before? I felt like this was her first time. Uninspired - not looking forward to her next class.",1
61603,"The lessons on presentation skills and traditional media should have taken just one one or two minutes, and one or two slides, at most. The details and time invested really had little to do with digital marketing or the digital landscape. The use of the hand-written pros and cons was an unnecessary novelty. Regular bullet text are more readable and technically more reliable. Most of all, the presenter's style was distracting. It seemed that she was unsure of her subject matter and script. I recommend re-scripting and rehearsing the presentation -- before re-shooting it. Finally, with the rapid pace of change in digital, we should not be using reading material more than two or three years old. Five years is tantamount to a generation in the digital world.",1
61606,The professor is just reading the text. Not really a good example of interactive e-learning content.,1
61607,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
61609,"Wow that was a waste of my time.So many broken elements, mistakes etc. Last minute rush job putting this course together.",1
61616,Professor just re-iterated text and readings. Lectures were poor and provided no insights,1
61617,Terrible course.... the instructor just read out of the power point. No examples or case studies or insights.very disappointed in the class.,1
61634,"This course seems to have interesting content and presentation, but the quiz concerns the materials not covered in lectures or readings (be it required or supplementary). This is totally confusing.",1
61638,"Incorrect references, subtitles that do not follow the video. Questions in the questionnaires that have not been studied and which one does not even know where to find references. The worst course of this certificate.",1
61642,"Un-organized, scattered non professional course. All the materials keep changing during the course. Materials in each module includes readings and exams were not related. Though, I enjoyed the other courses in this series and think they were great, but I am afraid this one was a real disappointment.",1
61648,Such a boring class,1
61650,"Shouldn't be presented as a course that is also suitable for English speakers. It is not. The ""English"" subtitles are completely incomprehensible.",1
61651,they have to put a note that this course is just for Turkish students not for international .,1
61657,Only one star as it was not made clear you could also get 1/5 points in assignments noted as ties but no further explanation. I don't think I will bother with part 2,1
61684,Not as advertized and way too much peer rating stuff--we do all the work the instructor does little or none--too much peer raqting stuff which I despise. And there seems to be no way to un-enroll.,1
61690,"I advice NOT to take this course.Why: the professor is never there to read your assignments. He leaves that totally to other students like yourself, to grade your written assignments, and, they do not read and give you a RANDOM grade in 2 seconds.Don't take it, you will waste sooo much time on this one.",1
61724,"The videos lag behind, and the readings the first one of the first week, the link was broken",1
61828,really bad!,1
61869,I could not upload a correct video as I do not have the knowledge to do so but I didnot get to finish the course which I think is unfair. There should be some other ways of uploading the homework. I have given two stars not because the course is not good but because I was unfairly given less marks and as below70% is not passed did not get to complete the course,1
61930,bad coarse unclear one,1
62057,"A lazy reviewer gave me the score of 0 and left me this comment: ""I am not able to give any score, I tried very hard to understand the matter but it was difficult for me. I have to score it just for me to check the other student's work. Please don't consider my scoring here."" I studied hard and received this poor evauation. I screamed for help many times but no one replied to my request. The quality of the course is superb and my experience is completely ruined by a shitty score which does not reflect my work.",1
62090,"I couldn't get passed the Starbuck assignment, I don't really understand why the choose such a bad application of digital marketing.",1
62122,"Really poor approach to grade this course. Regardless of the effort put in on assignments, peer reviews are inconsistent, unguided and poor as a result, bringing down the final grade one is likely to obtain on a course. There is also a limited course support from the staff and no feedback in general for any of the issues raise. Personally I would not recommend",1
62274,Someone who doesnt pay doesnt really participate in this course,1
62282,"I have to apologize this course was so out of date. Yes, I learned a few things, but the recommended reading was from 2010 and 2011. One of the assignments was about an app that no longer exists. Had I not already purchased multiple classes I don't think I would continue on. I hope the next classes are more up-to-date.",1
62294,"No guidelines for peer review assessments, technical issues, very clunky website.",1
62330,"I found this course to be very basic. I appreciate that Marketing requires a broad interaction, but a course designed to take 4 weeks (with 2~3 weeks of actual content) is too much. I need to learn about cost-per-click, impressions, ROI on ad spend - that sort of thing. I don't see how 3D printing is relevant to the majority of people in marketing today.",1
62369,So academic... Interview with students has no value and no point.,1
62420,Content needs to be updated,1
62424,"Contrary to what is being billed here, all the concepts here are from the more traditional school of marketing. The way the 4Ps are explained and applied (through barely) related to consumer products that are retailed. Digital marketing has barely made a dent in their revenues.Technology products don't follow this model.Another annoying aspect of this course is that things are not well defined so they can't be applied. ""customer co-creation"" is presented as a ground breaking idea but it is defined so vaguely. The definition states that customer co-creation is any contribution by a customer or otherwise that helps shape the products. What is considered contribution? Is product feedback contribution? If so, this idea is as old as a Bazaar. Or does the customer actually have to do creative work, in the case of Threadless.The big problem with this course is that it does not introduce the student to any new mental frameworks, leave alone anything practical. This course is a prime example of academiaitis - ideas created in ivory towers without any practical input or use.",1
62426,"Paid for the course and never took it. Terrible professor teaching the course, the format was poorly put together, and just wasn't overall a very good course.",1
62473,I can't start this course,1
62495,very boring,1
62502,"The videos are long and not engaging enough. Rather than digital marketing concepts, this was more an application of trends to traditional marketing concepts. Some of the topics are already outdated and some assignments were more applicable to those residing in the U.S. or are not exactly feasible to do at this point.",1
62531,"Didn't think that this is the best course for people who want to learn about Digital Marketing. The learning process is very slow and sometimes I felt that more could be learnt by just reading a number of books or articles on this topic.There is no dialogue with the professor (or anyone who has more experience or knowledge, the assignments are checked by people who are also taking this course. Though one would expect to learn from the assignments and mistakes he or she makes during it. Instead some people who have ideas, maybe even wrong ones, about this specific area of knowledge, judge your work (I could be also wrong about those things and have to grade somebody's work, which is a bit confusing).Besides, the assignments are not very interesting or challenging. I wouldn't recommend passing this course.",1
62534,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
62636,"IMHO a very superficial course.Lots of outdated material (user-generated content was a big thing 5 to 10 years ago, not anymore). Lacked going in depth.It discouraged me from pursuing the rest of the specialisation.",1
62841,"The teacher lacks the ability of mathematical description, including clearing defining concepts, describing everything in mathematical languages, and showing math formulas of t-tests. She hopes to hide everything behind the canvas and just show how statistics are applied. But without enough mathematics nothing she said makes sense. I have to search on the internet to get to know what she didn't teach.------from a math phd.",1
62895,"If you have higher education, and studied derivatives and matrices, this course is a quick review and test of your skills. If you never studied course subjects, you would hardly be able to learn them through this course. I completed it as a part of specialization, that's the only reason.",1
62896,"It was painful to work through the videos at first place, for more than one reasons. Very linmited (I would say insufficient) and inconsistent use of background data (diagrams, equations, symbols,pointers) on the board to support what was been talked about. It felt like a plain reading of mathematical expressions and descriptions. As a consequence I had to completely rely on the www to learn the topics covered so I could do the exercises. If that is how the standard of tutoring is to unfold for UoL Global MBA program (to which this is a foundation), I would seriously reconsider my decision to go for. I have been into a MOOC UCL and regret to say this course (Quantitative Foundations for International Business) is a big disappointment. Hope someone listens and th",1
62905,"This course has little or no information, not at all what was advertized, too much peer stuff",1
62934,"Not good at all.We see different processes without anyone making clear the reason why we should apply this processes ,under which conditions and what is the question that we have to answer when we apply these processes.The only good is that we get into some new terms and see new things.I could say that for me,it wouldn't make such a difference if it wasn't in this specialization.",1
62938,"Actually i want rate 0, as the instruction for the installation of new tools are quite vague and misleading",1
62944,Not impressed with the teaching style.Seems that lectures were being read and not taught.,1
62961,"I was not impressed. (And not impressed with this automatically centered text box either.) There was far too much very technical detail that no one save those working for hedge fund developers would ever use. The volume of analysis they suggest is overwhelming and impossible for the average investor, and when all is said and done, worthless. The market moves on news, rumors, scandal, etc; think Enron, Worldcom, Texaco, et al. None of the concepts presented in this course would have prevented you from investing in those companies when they were beginning or in their prime.I'm about to become a registered investment advisor. I took this course looking for ideas to improve my recommendations. No go. This was terrible.In addition, the presentation was presented by automatons I think. They rarely looked at us, they read flatly from the prompter. A good text to speech program could easily have replaced the ""teachers"".",1
62984,need a sub. can't not understand what he is saying,1
62989,need to pay to submit quiz.,1
63062,This course assumes that you are familiar with freeRTOS.,1
63108,"It is not what I was expecting to learn from this course. The course syllabus seems very good but the actual lectures are not good. I would not recommend this course to any one. I don't think we can call this as introduction of HRM because it doesn't give us any knowledge related with HRM. The only new term to me is the high-road vs. low-road, the rest is the common sense to me.",1
63148,"pure information, a lot of ""w",1
63341,The lecturers have poor vocabulary and pronunciation and the videos are very repetitive. They r repeating the same thing in all the videos.,1
63358,"There's no support from the staff. The staff is completely absent in the recent discussion forums, it seems they have abandoned the course few months ago.You have your assignments evaluated by only one peer, and that doesn't protect your final grade from wrong evaluations.",1
63362,"Nothing new to learn here, this is very dull in contrast to other courses of this spec. I gave up watching the videos after a while and try to pass anyway. Too bad this is part of this spec, I wish Marco or Matthew taught this course too. This course is very hard to follow and not interactive at all. It should take the students through examples, live examples the student can do too, and things the student builds from scratch. This does nothing like that.DON'T take this course if you aren't after the specialisation certificate. It's not worth the time and effort.Too bad this spec includes this course, it shouldn't be here.",1
63375,was not as good as previous courses in this specialisation,1
63379,"This is a complete waste of time. The other courses were really good but with this course I:Learned nothing newUnlearned best practises from the previous coursesMick doesn't seem to understand what he is presenting himself at times, the supplied code does not match the video's, the assignments change when I already submitted it (from upload a zip to deploy) and the assignments are copy pasted. I think it would help to take this part out of the specialisation.",1
63394,"The course content is really poor, I do not recommend this course if you are actually interested in learning anything.",1
63396,The material is extremely fragmented and it seems like that the instructor is just throwing information at you without caring if you are absorbing any of it at all. I got a headache and lost my motivation to learn the subject!,1
63406,concepts on prospect theory is not explained correctly,1
63413,"Very theoretical, lack of clear structure and arguments, sadly, one of the weakest courses I've seen on Coursera.",1
63415,Professor is really bad. Had to google most of the topics to understand them better. Not at all up to the usual Coursera standards. My sympathies to the people who have paid for this course.,1
63420,"I've taken 4-5 courses on Coursera before and always found the quality top notch. Sorry to say but this particular course doesn't even begin to compare. I'm struggling to even get through the first week of videos. I find it unstructured and rather poorly presented. The important concepts that should be explained are being skimmed over but binary terms and concepts are delved into detail. The first two or three videos have an immense amount of repetition: same sentence/content repeated 2-3 times in a different manner. Coursera and the University should seriously consider re-doing this particular course. If I had paid for this, I would've been very unhappy.",1
63532,"The professor has a very biased view of the Islamic world, which is heavily based on his opinion and approach not on the real facts and dominant his",1
63580,"The EEPROM project in week 3 is undoable with the specified simulator, as the simulator is simply not functional. I tested different computers, windows and mac operating systems, different browsers, different security settings, etc. Nothing works. The assignment is also way beyond the level of an introductory course. In addition, the complete lack of discussion forums attached to the course suggests that it is preferable to shut off discussion than to address the problems. Speaking of which, a search of the general forums indicate that this has been an ongoing issue since the latter half of 2015. Seriously, what the hell? Many people don't have a ton of extra money to throw away on garbage, and you are selling a defective product.",1
63628,Really bad explanation no code explain they left you on your own i'ts supposed to teach you not to left you undestand nothing they just teach components but the real thing the progaming is undeground no one knows that kinda weird :(,1
63639,"Not in-depth enough. Just barely cover basics of Arduino and a few shields you can use, but fails to go on to build on top of that knowledge.",1
63670,The course is almost about nothing. It seems to me that the teacher didn't make enough preparations and make a lot of mistakes during the couse. After 8 weeks of Arduino-related courses I've got almost nothing new besides first 2 chapters of Arduino Starter Kit book.,1
63684,The professor was completely inadequate. Many parts were unsuitable for this course. He has eliminated the useful discussions among students without explanation.,1
63713,"No forum, what are you thinking!",1
63831,"Hard to understand professor. When one needs to read the english subtitles to understand the english the professor is speaking, it becomes inherently difficult in an online course. Also, please kill the intro video for each course. It is completely unnecessary as the courses are labeled on the left side of the screen. Good material, but difficult to watch towards the end of the course.",1
63997,"This course was ultimately frustrating to take. There is a gap in the material presented and the skill set needed to complete the assignments. Using optional methods to complete this course, such as to use the textbook and forums, is too time consuming (deciphering a text book) or insulting (forum mentor responses).To to solve the assignments, it usually involved trying to 1. refreshing yourself in math concepts not used by a beginner or non-mathematician, 2. deciphering what exactly the poorly written questions were asking, 3. scouring the textbook or internet for functions or strategies never covered in the lecture, 4. having snarky and unhelpful remarks by mentors.The unprofessional behavior of the mentors was especially hard to handle. Even from the early week's lectures we learned about semantics, and how simple mistyping could lead to programming errors, so I wrongly assumed the mentors would understand that some of us would probably make simple errors. For example, in the final homework I had a simple mistake, but since we cannot show code, it led to more frustration and a mentor basically just saying ""we covered this already."" I'm well aware of what we covered, but if someone is stuck on a problem, there needs to be a much better way of helping that person. I did not want to write in the forums after my initial foray in the forum led one mentor to just tell me ""your logic is wrong"", and the spout the same simple strategies of the lecture that could not help on the complex assignment.There probably will not be anything fixed with this course since it seems like it has been the same for years now. Please fix the questions, stop using Project Euler, and let people directly message code to mentors. Will probably save time rather than try to blindly (and frustratingly) explain code over and over again. Ultimately, I felt that unless someone either has previous experience in coding, or has no work to do other than to do this course, it still is not worth it to just obtain a certificate.",1
64007,"Course contained unbelievable amount of silly busywork that has no place being implemented in MATLAB, while forbidding the use of most useful built in functions. At no point during the course was any of the MATLAB's strengths -- like easy solving of linear systems or vectorized operations, even suggested upon.Furthermore, the course has unhealthy interest in dates and calendars - again of course disabling all the built in tools.",1
64023,Boring Professor,1
64220,"If you are considering this specialization I would recommend the Andrew Ng course instead and the main reason is that it isn't depend on proprietary ML framework. Despite the good lectures, the assignments don't help you develop the knowledge required for ML developer role.Taking in consideration the permanent postponing the courses delivery, from summer 2016 to summer 2017, finally the most interesting part of the specialization was cancelled. I'm completely disappointed with the specialization learning expirience.",1
64226,Not happy about course 5 & 6 got cancelled.,1
64228,No good without the missing course and capstone projects,1
64235,This specialization is delayed for months now - very annoying! Don't give them money!,1
64312,"I was pretty disappointed with this course. Firstly, the course did not seem well balanced meaning that some weeks--particularly week 2--had A LOT of materials to watch and really felt like it was two weeks crammed into one, and then other weeks barely had anything.Secondly, the exercises seemed unclear, poorly thought out and not really helpful. There were many errata that really should have been fixed in the beta iterations of this course.Thirdly, I really would like to see more application and less discussion of implementing algorithms.Fourthly, the ""scaling"" section was also a major disappointment. While it is mildly interesting to learn about stochastic gradient descent, I think it would have been more interesting to have a discussion about how classifiers work in a parallelized computing environment or actually to try one out using Spark.Finally, given that GraphLab/Dato/Turi was just acquired by Apple, I question whether it is worthwhile to take this course as ALL the materials are taught using a library that in all likelihood will cease to exist.",1
64353,"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.",1
64416,After 2 great courses this one is really disappointing!,1
64458,"I understand it is a technical subject but going slide after slide reading the material without any clear explanation, is not learning is just reciting.It would have been better to try and put only half of the facts (we can always search for specific flag) and explain more about use cases.There has to be a better way to pass the materials.",1
64477,Very Poor Course.Should be removed from Coursera.,1
64496,What is the reason to put together so much details about network packet headers and all other parts of this course? I think this info completely useless here and must be part of any specialized networking course.,1
64533,Assighnment is partly possible only with classmate who has full knowledge of python!,1
64693,"Although the content is interesting, I would have liked it better had the content and the instructor been a little more engaging.",1
64854,Totally not what I expected. Most of it was concerned with mathematical problems.,1
64866,My laptop was not sufficiently fast to run Oracle VM (I'm using Ubuntu) and there where no other instructions for how to install the Oracle dbms,1
64905,Too much mathematic approach,1
65021,"Overall I was disappointed with this course. In the end I don't think it was any better than any of the free online tutorials out there. The instructor spoke so quickly in the videos he was nearly incomprehensible. The explanations were incomplete at best and most of the time amounted to nothing more than ""type this... now type this."". I'm well aware that the only way to learn programming is by doing it yourself, but if I pay for a course I expect an explanation of how things work under the hood. I was looking forward to taking the entire Ruby On Rails specialization, now I'm not so sure.",1
65027,Please update the given Gemfile in Homework.,1
65032,"I thought this course was very disappointing, to the point where I'm not able to finish it. In week one, we learned some basics. In week two, the entire language was dumped on us with no real exercises. Then we were asked to write some programs. The programs didn't build knowledge piece by piece - it was just learn the language, now write these random programs. It was very disappointing. I sign up for courses because I want to learn piece by piece and get to practice each new thing. If someone is going to dump the whole of Ruby on me in 1 week I don't need the class, I can buy a book and get the same experience. There also wasn't a good grader provided. This really took the joy out of programming. I keep thinking I'll come back and finish the class but I haven't so far because I dislike how it's presented so much. A true disappointment.",1
65081,"Horrible. The tests make very little sense, use elements not described in the course and is generally very confusing.",1
65152,"Wordy, dirge like. The topic is interesting but the exposition is so boring - the reading of a lecture outline - that I'd rather study on my own 8-(",1
65170,bad instructor,1
65171,This is by far the worse course I'd ever had taken. If you are a beginner I suggest you go look somewhere else. The software installation is hardly explained (the instructor writes a whole bunch of code in the terminal without even explaining correctly what we are writing). I abandonned this course because the instructions were not clear enough.,1
65181,"I am afraid this is going to be a rather negative review. Having completed over 10 Coursera courses over the year, and numerous other online classes, this is officially the worst. For me personally, the whole course was a complete waste of time. Put it simply, the presenter can't teach, at least not the MOOCs. There were no structure. The instructions were all over the place, and explanations were inadequate. After drumming how important to actually ""code"", he proceeded to present the whole lecture showing small pieces of codes.... on slides. After touting how cool and useful Sublime is as a developer tool, he didn't even use it. After telling everyone how useful regular expression is but not part of this course (so he won't explain), he went on to use regular expressions for all the sample codes for the rest of the lecture. As mentioned, there was no structure as to how he present Ruby/Rails as a programming platform. It was bits of code here, bits of code there. Beside getting a feel of what Ruby syntax is like, there was no learning. I am aware there are suggested readings, but then why doing this MOOC at all.As I check out other courses from the same Ruby specialization, the student numbers are getting smaller. Hardly everyone post on the forums, I also check the Classmates map. I suspect many simply gave up since the Intro classes were so bad. It's really not hard to find better material to learn Ruby/Rails, even just slightly better, even YouTube videos. I am frustrated at myself for putting in the effort (really try) and wasted days. I am leaving this course and unlikely to sign up any MOOC from the same team again.",1
65206,Poor help with instructions. Was trying to install to Linux while reading the video screen as there is little documentation or any actual explanation as to what you're doing. Got to a part where a command on my terminal wouldn't work and given I have no idea how it works to begin with I couldn't debug the issue.Also as a general review of the little of the course I did it's generally considered poor form to just read back what the viewer can see on the screen already when doing presentations. Was disappointed with this course.,1
65208,It assusmes quite a lot of things about web programming… and the assignments were too complex to just practice what we should learn in an introductory course.,1
65220,"Very bad course too fast is not an introduction more like a remember of things, this course try to covers too much information in 3 weeks and the assigments are not well guided and messy",1
65241,"A lot of things (Ruby version controls, PhantomJS installation) from this course don't work on Mac OS X El Capitan.",1
65262,Difficult to follow with no live coding.,1
65316,"No accurate help, no feedback on the graders, 2 out of 3 assignments where not specified correctly, or just wrong... this course will only teach you to be frustrated.",1
65320,"Are you a struggling programmer? Someone who doesn't know how to install software via command line? Not experienced with GitHub? If any of those describe you then this is not the course for you. The professors seem to create an environment where if you are too new to anything, then you should take a different course(even though every module has ""introduction to .."" in the title). Does Coursera offer introductory courses to Ruby or Ruby on Rails other than this ""introduction"" course? No.",1
65326,"I have done the data sciences specialization from JHU and that was 4 star on 5. Compared to that, this specialization is pretty bad.Not worth doing this specialization. Instructors are clueless on the plan",1
65428,Not interesting.To many examples about russian emitents,1
65455,"I'm actually REALLY INTERESTED on this course, but Erica's accent is TERRIBLE. It's so hard to understand and focus on what she's saying. Had to quit the course because of that.",1
65564,italian accent is way too strong.,1
65597,Completely disppointing.,1
65614,It is tottaly unacceptable to have to pay to pass quizz !!!I cancel my participation,1
65663,Cons:-Too dated - links to many of the materials are unavailable.-Instructors knowledge of some the models he cover is questionable (regression)Pros:-Covers a lot of materials,1
65764,too much theory and not nearly enough practical models that I can use in my life or work. Disappointed so much of the class was spent on describing many different models instead of focusing on ones that can be applied readily.,1
65808,The worst Coursera course I have taken. Total waste of time. The lectures are boring and have no real content. The supplementary materials are good though.,1
65811,"A very high-level introduction, but the analytical part is totally missing",1
65818,"Very little of use in this course. A lot of academic mumbo jumbo that is totally useless when confronted with the infinite investment opportunities. The student is presented with a number of time consuming/wasting formulas to apply to the decision process.If one ACTUALLY used those formulas, one would still be waiting to buy the first stock.A question from the Week 4 test will demonstrate just how useless this course is:The Situation: ""You invested to maximize your wealth over a one year period. You are eagerly anticipating the returns after the first month.""The Question: ""What part of your brain is being activated?""What's Wrong with this?First of all, who invests in order to make it big in one year. You are trading if that is your goal.Second: who gives a flying fig about what part of the brain is engaged? What am I supposed to do with the answer? How does this, in the least, help me make better investment decisions.I'm done. I was going to take all the courses in this specialization. No more. Waste of time and money.",1
65842,"I feel that this course is not looked after. Teachers are not actively present. There was an error on one quiz and another assignment was very poorly explained, leading to many feeling like we lost marks due to not knowing exactly what was expected of us. Many of the lessons waste time gushing over what's coming next, but quite often the lesson itself feels weak and vague. At some points I struggled to understand the point the lessons were trying to make. I learned a few interesting things, but for the most part I'm extremely disappointed with this course.",1
65866,"While this course presents great content and valuable information, the caveat is in the overall experience. The moderators and instructors are nonexistent and cannot be reached. There is only one moderator who finally did his job and showed up to deal with some issues that many classmates were having (including myself), and even his response time is only once every week! So, he only started checking in once a week after I had already nearly completed the whole course. There are also some serious issues with glitches, technicalities and not being able to pass assignments and grade others' assignments. I completed this course a week ago, and many of my classmates are not able to complete it due to extreme glitches, like the system not taking in their projects and not even allowing them to move forward. It's such a shame. I'm the lucky one in that I was able to finish the course. The others? Not so lucky. They're still stuck back there and the staff of this course is really just not around and doesn't care! It's such a shame because, like I said, the material presented in this course is informative and valuable information.",1
65883,"The female lecture's speech is so fast and unclear, even though the subject itself is very interesting but I have to leave this class.",1
65937,i dont know why quizzes are locked even though I'm enrolled in this course and already done watching all videos in it.,1
66017,The professor's voice put me to sleep; he was monotone. Online classes work best when interesting material is married to dynamic speakers.,1
66163,Too many obvious things.,1
66187,"The subject matter for this course is very, very interesting! The professor does a nice job of layering the complexity from basic concepts to more advanced concepts. However, this is where the ""good news"" ends. The course is full of all sorts of calculation errors on the graded quizes",1
66191,Way too many errors in the graded assignment. Non-reponsive teaching assistants.,1
66278,Got as far as lesson six. Took test and received 78%. Have been trying without success to retake the test. There does not seem to be anywhere to try and find out how to fix this.???????????????????????,1
66312,not all apps wok on my devices so I was unable to do assignment. Apple Annie was difficult,1
66315,"This was by far the worst course in the series.There is a lot of good content in this course that needs to be shared, but I just felt the delivery failed in a lot of ways.Here are some issues1) Often, concepts are thrown out but aren't explained clearly. Speaker glosses over them without giving concrete examples2) The structure of the course is poorly configured. On several occasions, inline quizzes test you on concepts that haven't been introduced until later in the video, forcing you to guess at answers. Also, the assignment portion of the course asks you to submit a word or pdf with images, but it wasn't configured to allow uploads. You could only submit text in a text box. I realized I wasn't the only person with the issue when I graded assignments from others who had trouble submitting their assignment. In some cases, I believe students failed that portion of the course because they could not figure out how to submit. I have some IT background and was able to share my homework through my shared drive fortunately.3) The speaker should re-record his lecture. It was obvious (or at least seemed as if) he was reading a teleprompter. There were many awkward pauses between sentences that made it hard to listen to. Often times, the audio presentation were inconsistent with the words in the slide, making it confusing because I didn't know which I should be following.",1
66318,"Submit button wasn't working for assignment, assignment was heavily weighted on mobile app (which was the least pertinent part of the course for me), generally seemed disorganized.",1
66447,What are you talking about?,1
66488,Not so good Lack of interest and practicability,1
66607,"repetitive content with other MOMA courses (seeing thru pictures)?? duh, not gonna pay $50 for this. :(",1
66633,Bad teacher. extremely disappointing !,1
66727,Not enough notes.,1
66736,"I was enrolled in the full specialisation and things went great for the 2 first courses i did, which were mostly peer-review-based (logistics & sourcing).With this one i gave up feeling really unassisted and unable to get answers to my feedback requests. no feedback is provided when you ask something in the forums, ever.When you flag a milestone because of technical issues you won't be ever answered (even when you upload screenshots as proof).The practical exercises with spreadsheets are poorly explained and even contradicted, especially as far as cutting and/or rounding integers are concerned. this is something that can prove 'costly' when doing the quizzes I failed all the questions of all the quizzes for all the attempts I tried. I'm not sure if this is coursera's fault or rutgers' but i don't think i will take ever another course (paying) here in coursera with these kind of calculation quizzes, it's a waste of time.I can't imagine how a mathematical or programming course must be with this poor approach of assessing the results. I suppose I will be censored if I explicitly mention similar sites to coursera but these kind of tests and quizzes are much more better addressed.In a nutshell, I subscribed to the full specialisation paying 45 EUR per month, the first month I was able to certificate myself with the 2 first I did ( logistics & sourcing), this second month (planning & operations) that has just started I gave up, so my final outcome is 2 certificates for 45 EUR each one.Tolerable but you'll never get me here again.",1
66772,"Just following a text book, without an added value from the lectures.",1
66774,Please get a more enthusiastic prof,1
66799,It was not the best course I did in Coursera. The teacher was distracted and I had some issues in following her. The information was sometimes too basic and other time on much in depth.,1
66803,"Disappointed with lectures-structured data rather than real life examples-professor is speaking monotonously, without passion-no visualisation on the discussed topic",1
66814,"Poor quality and heavily outdated content. Video quizzes were broken more often than not. Module Quizzes questions and answers were vague and poorly constructed resulting in choosing incorrect answers.Reading material was of poor quality with many ""industry professionals"" not being professional enough to perform a simple spelling and grammar check.",1
66816,Hated the course and the content. I truly regret investing my money on this course.,1
66821,Professor just re-iterated text and readings. Lectures were poor and provided no insights,1
66822,Terrible course.... the instructor just read out of the power point. No examples or case studies or insights.very disappointed in the class.,1
66832,"The two or three minute videos were annoying. I understand that this is what video marketing is about and, PS, not too many people truly watch the videos. Lessons should be 30 minutes each.",1
66835,I am not very happy with this course. It lacks depth. Reading the text book gives more understanding. The videos are just verbatim repetition of what is there in the book. The concepts are not explained well. No examples and no case studies. And further there are errors in quizzes. The first course in this specialization was really good... course 2 and 3 were also very informative. But 4 and 5 are not up to the mark and not meeting the high expectations set by the previous courses.,1
66878,TOO DIFFICULT,1
66886,"Complete idiot. He doesn't have any critical view of his field (which is unfortunately full of crappy studies). Also, I hope he didn't choose the logo from his university. It's a good metaphor for the course though, shiny but absolutely ridiculous.",1
66990,"Tortured by a platform glitch that initially denied me credit for my work and the certificate of completion but would not tell me specifically why. Turns out I needed to submit one additional peer review, although I only found this out by contact customer service. There was never any explicit message telling me what was required to complete the course and the information I did receive through the platform was just plain wrong. Content of the course was good but any feelings of accomplishment were overshadowed by the frustration of trying to straighten out what turned out to be a problem with coursera.",1
66997,"Money hungry, greedy! Won't let us complete quizzes without paying! Shame!",1
67065,"This class was extremely disappointing. While the material is interesting and the mathematics and computer science are excellent, the format of the course makes substantive learning difficult. The crux of the course is based on lecture videos. Unfortunately, the videos amount to the professor simply reading off Powerpoint slides with occasional quizzes in the video. There are only 4 programming assignments, the first of which demanded a total of 2 new lines of code. Later assignments are more involved, but there are still only 4 of them. I for one only learn effectively when the class is engaging. That means slightly more dynamic lectures, more involved assignments. I don't learn or retain anything meaningful from powerpoints and multiple-choice quizzes, and I know that many agree. If you're the kind of person who can learn from reading a powerpoint slide, then you'll be fine. I got nothing out of this course.",1
67089,"The lesson is really boring , and the lecturer just reads the slides. And there is no any interaction on the slides, or explaining on the graphs and meaning of sentence. Just read it through. I am enough of this kind of lesson.",1
67103,"While I learned quite a bit from the course, I found the course to be far more difficult and frustrating than it really needed to be. Mentors were unhelpful and generally unresponsive during the course, course content was broken and/or missing, and the level of background in both calculus/probability needed to truly understand the material in this course was not obvious at all from the beginning. In general, the holistic experience of this course was disappointing and frankly, I would not recommended it unless you have a strong enough math background or are a glutton for punishment.",1
67131,"I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that this is a poorly made course for building a thorough understanding of how these different Neural Networks actually function, and building a lower level understanding. The lecturer often introduces concepts that are specific to these types of neural networks without explaining what they are. For example, when discussing convolutional nets, he casually starts talking about an embedding layer and a mapping layer, without really explaining what it is. I found this video on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6aEYuemt0M) and realized that this gives me a significantly more concrete understanding of how convolutional neural networks actually function, than these lectures.",1
67175,Doesn't effectively explain how to implement the NN,1
67205,"The pedagogy in this course is truly horrible. It is severely lacking concrete relevant real world examples - in the beginning of each lecture would be super - motivating each technique. This is kind of a dealbreaker. Furthermore the material is REALLY dry and theoretical, lacking pragmatic problem solving. IMO way too much time and energy is wasted on history, name-dropping and dry mathematical backrounds. Andrew Ng of Stanford University, with his course ""Machine Learning"" is a great example of how it can and should be done.Suffice to say it would be much more smoth, fun and efficient to start with 1) current real world relevant problem(s) motivating the technique, then 2) a clear description of the technique - with concrete examples mapping the theory to practice. This last part is super important and is what is lacking the most in the course. One more thing, the quizes and questions makes alot of silent and weird assumptions, often not even clearly relating to the lecture materials. There are also technical bugs and missing images in the quizes. Suffice to say this is a real dealbreaker.",1
67208,"this course is incredible boring. I'm really interested in the topic, but the way it is presented is just sad. only theory and slides with way too much text. I've already taken several ML classes and this one is still hard to follow. Can't recommend it.",1
67248,"Not clear illustration， many problems are not directly related to the content covered. More importantly, it sucks!",1
67258,I did not enjoy how this course was taught. It was confusing and hard to understand the professor did not go at a pace i found helpful.,1
67292,Buddhism conversion course.,1
67442,"Too much introduction, not much actual useful stuff. Too much mathematically without well illustrated examples.",1
67502,"If you are considering this specialization I would recommend the Andrew Ng course instead and the main reason is that it isn't depend on proprietary ML framework. Despite the good lectures, the assignments don't help you develop the knowledge required for ML developer role.Taking in consideration the permanent postponing the courses delivery, from summer 2016 to summer 2017, finally the most interesting part of the specialization was cancelled. I'm completely disappointed with the specialization learning expirience.",1
67503,Not happy about course 5 & 6 got cancelled.,1
67504,No good without the missing course and capstone projects,1
67509,This specialization is delayed for months now - very annoying! Don't give them money!,1
67539,"For me, this course was disappointing. Here is why: First, the level, at which the course material is presented, is very low. It might be freshman level, but certainly not more. There are many buzzwords but no real explanations. The programming assignments are only doable because most of the work has been done by the people designing the assignments. There is very little left for the students. Furthermore, the procedures, that are already given, are not very well documented. Hence, a lot of guess work is required to figure out how things should work. Furthermore, little effort has been spent to structure the procedures that are already given. Altogether, this makes doing the programming assignments very unsatisfying.Finally, the professor presenting the materials does not take part in the discussion forums. Contrary to other courses that I have attended at Coursera, this time the discussion forum was no help at all.",1
67586,"The course, and indeed the whole specialization, was advertised as not requiring the Graphlab Create toolkit. This is untrue, as the final programming assignment does require it. The general dependence on SFrame is understandable since it is open source, but requiring any interaction with a licensed product (even if temporary and research licenses are available) greatly negatively impacted my experience in this course.",1
68001,"My only happiest moment in this whole course is writing this review, I couldn't wait to finish it in order to give it the 1 star rating it deserved.What I've seen from this course so far is abandonment , that's right this course is abandon ware, no questions get answered on the forums (asked a question a month ago and still didn't get an answer) and the links are outdated (links to further documentation don't work).I wouldn't recommend this course to anyone wanting to learn Machine learning since the instructors use proprietary libraries that need a license to use outside this course thus application wise what you learn her isn't transferable only the conceptual content;however, even in that there isn't much content for, since everything is an introduction here so nothing is quite useful .If your on a tight budget and your taking this specialization you could skip this course. Actually you could even skip this specialization since they canceled the capstone project so investing any money and time here is a waste. I can only recommend this specialization/course IF the instructors add a project at the end , be more involved on the forums , update non functional links ,and finally USE NON PROPRIETARY libraries hence they will need to take feedback from the students and redo most components of this specialization.",1
68023,"Maybe a good course, but you need to be an IT crack to be able to install the software and make it works. Online help does not help. Irritating! 45USD lost. I don't recommend this course.",1
68084,"If you are considering this specialization I would recommend the Andrew Ng course instead and the main reason is that it isn't depend on proprietary ML framework. Despite the good lectures, the assignments don't help you develop the knowledge required for ML developer role.Taking in consideration the permanent postponing the courses delivery, from summer 2016 to summer 2017, finally the most interesting part of the specialization was cancelled. I'm completely disappointed with the specialization learning expirience.",1
68095,Not happy about course 5 & 6 got cancelled.,1
68137,This specialization is delayed for months now - very annoying! Don't give them money!,1
68214,"I did not find the course very good. I came into the class with only real basic knowledge of Python and I was hoping to be able to pick up more as part of this class. WHile I might have picked up more, it was only because I used resources outside the course.The video instructions in programming in Python left quite a few gaps to figure out by reading documentation. The videos themselves were divided into two sections -- first a theoretical or classroom like section and a second a lab/programming section going over some coding in Python. The 'classroom' type lectures were pretty reasonably good. But the lab/programming were pretty terrible.They instructor really break down the syntax of the code and just left the student to figure it out. This made being able to take this code and to adapt it to other uses very difficult.I would not recommend this as a course to help learn Python.",1
68289,there is no proper documentation.at least there should be some clear instructions for first program,1
68348,"Might be good for someone looking for a casual overview?I really wanted to like this course, and was excited about the series. Very disappointing. Refunded after scoring 100% on first three weeks and watching the theory portion of week 4. I was familiar, with the subject prior to taking this course; was hoping for a deep dive.Too many trivially short and low information density videos. Handwavy mathematics. I would have liked to get a more solid idea of the depth of the series from the first course before committing money.Default software for the course has near-zero market penetration (per indeed.com), unless maybe you work at Apple -- not really excusable for something that purports real-world value. Yes, you can use other software, *except for the capstone*, per another reviewer: this is fatal.Presenters just not fully prepared to lecture on the topic: the nail in the coffin was the end of the week 4 lectures on clustering: ""So, at this point, you really should be able to go out there and build a really cool retrieval system for doing news article retrieval. Or any other really, really, really cool retrieval that I can't think of right now. But of course there's lots of interesting examples. So go out there and think of ideas that I can't think of right now."" Really? How about: ""Cut! Take two.""Many poor design choices for the presentation. Too much time spent writing things on slides that should have already been on the slides.As of this review: no reviews on the last courses in the series, and some poor (but indicative) reviews of the other courses.",1
68349,I felt that I paid for demo of the Dato/Turi.,1
68421,"The Lecturers are very enthusiastic, but I was hoping for examples and assignments based on Pandas and Skikit-Learn. Instead the course examples and assignments are based on a machine learning package called Graphlab, that stopped working when it was upgraded to version 2 (there are workarounds that enable it to work locally, but clearly it isn't ""enterprise ready"")",1
68428,"I was expecting to solve problems using more open-sourced package. Unfortunately, I feel this series of courses are more of an advertisement for the instructor's software company.",1
68461,"The course is basically an advertisement for the software one of the teachers created. I did learn a bit of high level concepts, but when it comes to coding, the answers is always 'conveniently, my software does this for you'. I wanted to actually learn about these concepts deeper, and implement them.I also was able to complete this 6 week paid course in a few days which should not be possible. I have since started the free Stanford course taught by a co-founder of coursera, and it is MUCH better! I recommend it to anyone!",1
68463,Shame that it was not possible to progress with this course without using graphlab which the creator of this course himself created. Please see the course as just a training sales promotion for his ML application.,1
68503,"The whole course based on some proprietary software. In general, it seems that the main goal of the course is promote that software.",1
68519,"No Open Source Libraries, this course is not educational; it is a sales pitch to use their expensive software. Good luck having an employer pay this amount of money for software when they can hire employees that can use free open source libraries.",1
68544,Too many videos and not cluttered assignment codes,1
68548,Dato tool does not even install properly.. so n´makes no sense to continue with the course. The support team fail to help in installing ... :-(,1
68579,I feel like it should have been mentioned a lot clearer before starting that this was simply a course in how to use the creators library. These skills are not transferable anywhere else as I would have to pay to use them in future! Would have been a lot more useful as a how to for sci-kit and pandas.,1
68739,Unsufficient information for the programming assignments.,1
68773,"The course has a fundamental problem, it relies completely on a library developed by one of the instructors, which is not open source. In the end, it seems like a big opportunity of delivering a marketing campaign by the instructors then otherwise.I definitely will not spend time and money on the other courses of this specialization.",1
68819,i cannot spend $4000 per year package just to learn this course. sorry i am off...,1
68844,"Using a proprietary library instead of widely used libraries and discouraging the use of open source widely used libraries. It barely compiles, the example notebook has method calls that use non existing methods of the SFrame object.The course claims that it teaches the student how useful practical knowledge but then ends up using a non standard library and saying not to use pandas or scikit learn.",1
69040,"I dont like the tools they used, it seems like a promotion for their company.",1
69136,The fact that the class uses GraphLab instead of pandas/numpy/sklearn should have been stated up frontThe course felt like an advertisement for the professor's toolkitIt was very disappointing that the equivalent standard workflow was not supported,1
69142,Thoroughly disappointed to see this course based on,1
69157,Would have greatly preferred if open source tools were used.,1
69159,"This course rely on commercial library. I am sorry, I don't believe the convenience of a commercial library is good for your learning. You may end up locked in.",1
69170,"In terms of content the course is superficial and weak, it's also too much focused on promote Cruyff event and institute.",1
69205,It would be better if the instructors cared to respond to queries.,1
69253,This course is a sequence of sales pitches by Hlavac's relations. The continuous invitation to purchase a course where companies advertise their products is a shame and lacks in depth material. Followed the whole course in the hope it would get better but unfortunately got more irritated than educated.,1
69310,"Not a very interesting class, only learned some vocabulary and some pre made sentences, but no general structure or grammar. This means that it would be impossible for me to even guess how to form an other sentence with the words i know.",1
69428,Where do I start?,1
69502,I'm not a conversational learner. I like to learn via the puzzle method.,1
69538,I didn't find this course to be too helpful.,1
69540,"This is very basics hence getting a certificate is not valuable. I would consider getting a certificate, if it means something hence beyond a very basic crash course. The certification, should be, I can really use and means something.",1
69549,"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.",1
69551,"Unfortunately, not very engaging.",1
69586,Im not finishing it since in the test are missing a lot of sounds ..............,1
69617,too hard for a beginner,1
69670,"not practical, some audio files are not working ...",1
69683,Goes waaaay too fast to actually learn anything. Not very useful.,1
69712,"Videos proceed way too fast for complete beginners and things are explained without enough underlying basics. Plus there is not really enough chance for repetitions in the videos. Tonal explanations are good, except for the green line where you are not told how to choose what part of that tone to pronounce every time. Overall, it could be a great course but falls short because the videos proceed way too fast and without enough repetitions or even practice exercises to be able to remember the phrases afterwards.",1
69793,Not a very good course layout,1
69826,The subject seems so interesting but we need more historical information. It's nice to have a personal point of view but it is difficult to follow the process then.,1
69857,"This course is quite outdated. I didn't learn much beyond what I already knew before I started. The Spark courses from edX are way better than these. Hopefully ""Big Data Analysis with Scala and Spark"" from the ""École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne"" (also from Coursera) is good (I know their Scala courses, which are taught by Martin Odersky, are quite good).There are very few quizzes between lectures and the assignments are not very challenging.Many of the videos, specially the ones at the end were extremely rushed over. They serve more as a review if you know the subject, otherwise I don't think most people will get much from them.The audio isn't very good for most of the lectures, many having an very annoying chirping sound (from when you leave an old flip phone near a computer... ""teh-teh-teh teh-teh-teh teh-teh-teh teh-tehhhhhh...."". Gosh, I haven't heard this sound in maybe over five years...).The Kaggle competition at the end of the course can be fun if you do the hard work, but you don't need to put much of an effort to pass. I know that the submissions I peer reviewed were quite poor, but the grading criteria that we need to follow as reviewers is quite vague and not very thorough. You also run the risk of getting a lesser grade than you deserve because your reviewer is incompetent, which is a bummer... At the moment the course has very few people taking it (the same people I peer reviewed, also reviewed me, which leads to me to believe that maybe only 3 or 4 people were taking this course during the November 2016 iteration).",1
69882,"Terrible lecture videos with many typos, absence of lecture notes, absence of course staff on a discussion forum. Maybe suitable for those who is alredy a scientist and just need to get some general sence of data science.",1
69890,"Hands down the worst course on Coursera. I thought it might be beneficial to take this course but it doesn't cover anything in details. Wherever algorithms are explained, a really lousy job is done. To be specific, first and second weeks are covered badly. I am still trying to understand the material by reading external articles on the course topics. I think that first course of this specialization was pretty great and this one is disappointing.",1
70086,"This is for people doing social work in third world countries. Trust me, videos discussing open defecation and child marriage get old fast. Also, the stuff about social norms is very confusing and hard to understand.",1
70112,The quiz in this course is not helping this learning experience to be positive,1
70282,Just like other University of Maryland online courses - boring,1
70323,"I signed up for this course hoping for a good introduction to OO programming and Java only to not be able to verify if I have even learned anything. Of course I can access the course material, but the fact that cannot even manually check if my answers are correct with certainty makes all of this less efficient than simply learning it by myself.",1
70344,The course does not allow students to take part in quizzes before paying for it.but the quality of the course material is amazingly high and easy to follow.,1
70382,Instructors are not to be found.,1
70508,"in the beginning of the course i thought i'll get a good experience as usual on coursera, but i was wrong ...a lot of things >> to be introduced in next courseconfusing data types & working with things i don't know about it.you've said that, anyone with basics of programming could pass this course and after 6 months i couldn't.please be sure about the prerequisites next time.",1
70590,"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.",1
70749,Cannot follow a single thing that they are talking about. I have prior coding experience in other languages and I still have no idea what the instructors are getting at. They all explain everything horribly and jump into huge complex things with no explanation. Worst course I have ever taken in my life.,1
70764,starting from week2 the way of explaining the materials isnt good,1
70861,Not as advertized and way too much peer rating stuff--we do all the work the instructor does little or none--too much peer raqting stuff which I despise. And there seems to be no way to un-enroll.,1
70866,"I advice NOT to take this course.Why: the professor is never there to read your assignments. He leaves that totally to other students like yourself, to grade your written assignments, and, they do not read and give you a RANDOM grade in 2 seconds.Don't take it, you will waste sooo much time on this one.",1
70887,"Mr Roth is woefully unprepared for this course, his assessments of the several artists and thinkers he explores are deeply and distressingly flawed - and why would he repeat in a classroom, with unbecoming histrionics, the same lesson he's just delivered from his office",1
70898,Too much material to get done in time frame given for full-time working parent.,1
71078,Not very practical.,1
71179,As a Java programmer with some 18 years industry experience I quickly got lost on this course. It might not be the course - it could be me! It might be that I am too long in the tooth as an OO programmer that I cannot cope with the transition to functional programming.I found the video lectures initially well structured and stepped nicely in to increasing complexity without losing me. But eventually I fell completely behind and by the time I was performing the exercise 2 submission I was in deep water. There are a lot of mathematical theory and programming theory references along the way as well which I did not like.As a real world programmer I have never really felt compelled to know peano number theory. And I struggle to understand how performing this exercise prepares me for real-world Scala programming either. I just do not see the point of creating code that can add and subtract numbers without using number types!!! I could write a wrapper for Int in Java in 2 minutes. Doing this abstract Scala exercise would take me all day and I still do not understand the code nor the point of doing it! Whatever happened to maintainability principles ?I have now lost all interest in completing the course because by week 3 I might as well be doing a course in advanced Arabic. I cannot continue this course now because I cannot complete the exercises. I am disheartened and not sure whether this is a reflection of Scala or the course or both. I would be reticent to take a job with Scala.,1
71264,"Bad logic.Class content poorly related to the exams. No exercise for practice. When any, clearly unrelevant. The first 4 weeks, it is hard to impossible to succeed through the exam. Run all videos set first, then consider digging into practice.I took a book and learned more form it than this video.",1
71535,"I am a statistician who works primarily with R, with some Python for the things Python is better for. I know how to program, but I explicitly note I am not a computer science student. I have only limited experience with the command prompt. I was very excited when I heard about this course, but the amount of work and frustration just to get started programming in Scala has been obscene. I am very, very glad I decided to check out the course for free before paying for the specialization.The course has a lot of required software. The tutorials to get this software often involve ""You need this, but so save time we're going to skip showing you how to get it. If it doesn't work, you need to install it."" There is a lot of variability in OSs. Many errors are often encountered. There is no help.Among the things the course requires are two (three?) IDEs for Scala (I note the video tutorials says you just need some sort of IDE... but you need IntelliJ, and Eclipse to submit...). The guides show how to get started on a Mac. The software is not the same on Windows, and so 'step by step instructions' become a guessing game, because many options or menus are missing or different.There are many better and more friendly guides on the internet. I may return to the transcripts of the course content here, but I won't be submitting any coursework. I'm going to warn my colleagues away as well. Forget Coursera - I'll just buy a book and work through it like everyone else I know.",1
71543,We spent several months waiting for this capstone to appear. The instructors dissapeared and nobody knew if this one was going finally to happen or what.,1
71643,"greed rules.... previously the course was free including the quizzes to check whether one learned something or not; now you have to pay 60$ just to check your learning progress (I do not need a certificate, just learning for myself)",1
71766,very very bad session,1
71774,It is so basic and simple.,1
71811,"Unfortunately I think the level for this course is very low and not worth paying for, it has a very local perspective of logistics (not involving international logistics but only US operations), there's no communication with the professor or assistants, so it's basically watching a few very short videos explaining general concepts that apply only to certain types of operations.The assignments are very vague, with no requirements or restrictions provided, basically anyone can write anything and as long as you follow the requested format it will be graded ok; grading is not based content and therefore there's no way to know whether you're learning and applying the concepts properly or not.Wouldn't recommend paying for it.",1
71836,"Could not follow very easily. Confused, gained nothing from the lectures. Really no substance to it.",1
72112,unable to do assignment wo today is last date,1
72133,"I've done a few online courses on various, and for me, this is poor. The content is gratingly simplified, the delivery worse. The instructions for the assignments are impenetrable at best. Unfortunately, I can't gain those moments that I've spent on this course back.",1
72216,it has to be reviewed,1
72298,"It was interesting to a point, but there was no application of the knowledge gained. It was merely a regurgitation of facts.",1
72305,I agree!,1
72331,the whole waste of time and energy,1
72367,"The Worst Course EVER on Coursera:It is important to realize at the outset that I am a very avid learner and always give everything a chance to be completely tried out before giving a judgement, and unfortunately, this course is by far, the only bad course I've encountered on Coursera for the following reasons:1- The professor wastes a whole week's module on explaining something trivial like the interest rate and compound interest rate without naming the necessary terminology that is commonly used.2- To make things worse, he has a condescending perspective on students and wastes so much time glorifying himself in an upsetting manner that patronizes learners.3- His demeanour is unprofessional and quite disturbing when he gives mentions at the end of the week that 'I can feel you. I can feel each one of you now' to the degree that even the camera-person filming him cuts his nonsense out.4- After putting up with all his boring nonsense that I already know, despite being a linguist not a finance person, I gave him a chance and started doing his first 10-question Quiz, which was completely isolated from reality and unrelated to his course material or teaching.5- All questions were boring and calculation-intensive, and I still gave him and a chance and went through the whole boring set of 10 questions just to tell me that it needs upgrading for such a banal and facile course.Now, I have an idea about the level of Teaching at Michigan University and I will recommend all my friends not to attend such a university due to the previously-mentioned reasons.A complete waste of space.",1
72394,"Not recommended at all. She gets some things right, but really wastes the opportunity to drill the most fundamental and important point about philanthropy: namely, that the most important factor in assessing a non-profit's value is effectiveness, and non-profits vary in their effectiveness by many orders of magnitude. Furthermore, a small number of Charity Evaluators and Meta charities have identified those charities which most effectively address the most common values of aspiring philanthropists.I don't recommend this course for anyone. Rather, I would strongly encourage anyone seriously interested Giving to check out Peter Singer's course, ""Effective Altruism"".",1
72418,There is a lot of material in this course that has not been explained,1
72455,"If you are considering this specialization I would recommend the Andrew Ng course instead and the main reason is that it isn't depend on proprietary ML framework. Despite the good lectures, the assignments don't help you develop the knowledge required for ML developer role.Taking in consideration the permanent postponing the courses delivery, from summer 2016 to summer 2017, finally the most interesting part of the specialization was cancelled. I'm completely disappointed with the specialization learning expirience.",1
72459,Not happy about course 5 & 6 got cancelled.,1
72460,No good without the missing course and capstone projects,1
72480,This specialization is delayed for months now - very annoying! Don't give them money!,1
72490,"The lecturers try to keep the instructions basic and pedagogical. Pretty good. Everything in this revolves around a tool graphlab create. Not so great, I think. It is not free (you get a one year licence) and hides all the action from the user. I don't like that the course then makes me feel that I must rely on a specific product to solve problems.",1
72594,I was not aible to complete this course for free. That was very disappointing! Universities like Stanford and John Hopkins find the opportunity to offer similar courses free of charge to peoople who want to learn. From University of Washington I have expected the same. Your bad!Best regardsKonstantin,1
72618,"this was a really boring course not for the contet bu the teacher i fell bored every video because the theacher was really slow in everything tha she was showing, it is realy dificult to get focussed in the real topics when the teacher spend a lot of time explaining things at the end wont be evaluated. As an example I am not english native speaker but a had to put the playback speed to 1.50x in order to not get bored in all videos, it was really dificult to follow the teacher at the normal velocity , i just got sleep every video. and as a record i really like this topic so it is the tacher, I took the first course and it was a good experience but this one is owfull",1
72633,"This course is structured around a specific and costly Python library called Dato. It is possible to do the homework without it, but it is EXTREMELY difficult to do so. If the course wasn't structured around using Dato, it would be a lot simpler and a easier to complete the assignments. Also, a lot of the mathematical notation was written in a kind of psuedo Python code that made things confusing sometimes.",1
72634,"I've spent a bit of time going through the Specialisation (paid for one course here) and other courses online that offer Machine Learning with Python. I looked at books too. I've come to the conclusion that it's unforgivable to teach it using graphlab (that you have to pay for after free licence expiry) when everyone else teaches scikit learn (sklearn) for good reason.The tools used on this course are also not very good.Everyone else teaches using text editors - for a good reason, you learn how to code properly.The lessons are also dry and there are far too many of them.",1
72685,"gets way too in-depth with the math behind regression, to the point that it deters from the learning process. was hoping to learn better methods of interpreting or enacting regression, not the inner workings of the algorithms.assignments got overly complex with confusing instructions. there are definitely some leaps made in the assumptions of what students' python capabilities are. vague instructions caused more frustration than desire to continue learning.will continue in the specialization, but will not hesitate to drop out if instruction continues like this.very disappointed.",1
72900,Would have liked to do the assignments if they weren't all locked by payment requirements,1
73143,need to change the instructor and the way the course is being taught,1
73144,"With all due respect to the lecturer (its obvious that he is intelligent and an expert on the subject), I found this lesson not easy to participate because of inordinate learning curve and fast accent.",1
73146,Week 3 application assignment is buggy. If you input correct answers they will be marked as incorrect. You must use trial and error to find the wrong answers the quiz is looking for. It's a badly designed assignment that wastes students' time and creates a lot of frustration. Would not recommend the course because of it.,1
73147,"This course is not well moderated, the material is confusing, and the quizzes were not tested before uploading them onto Coursera. This specialization is definitely not on par with other specializations I have done.BLUF: There are better uses for your money and time.",1
73151,Test questions for week 3 are incorrect and do not match video / reading. Had to go to YouTube to figure out most of it.,1
73153,Cannot understand the diction..,1
73156,"This course starts very simply with data clean up (almost too simply!), but then goes DEEP into the weeds of regression and fails to explain how to apply these complex concepts to any real world application. For example, if I build a regression model, how might I use it in my analytics role at work and explain the results to my stakeholders? How do i interpret the results of the regression for making informed business decisions? How do I predict an outcome with a Tree or Neural Network? I found the instructor very hard to follow/understand (thank goodness for the written transcripts). He's clearly extremely intelligent, but fails to relate these concepts to the student in order for the student to take away anything more than ""These complex concepts and tools exist.""",1
73192,"I think this course should be named basic iOS programming.The course doesn't provide professional UI design, just teach some basic which Human Interface guideline has.Also the instructor doesn't seem iOS expertise.",1
73241,Very American perspective.,1
73264,"Did not like the course, complicated concepts and poor representation. ( i still really really appreciate the efforts of those who put it together with their hard work)",1
73303,Very hard to follow. Needs to clarify more on it's work.,1
73490,"difficulf...very difficult, guys",1
73509,I do not like the Course. Too difficult for me. Slides are too full of written lines that professor Navarro simply reads.,1
73643,uses and ancient version of python,1
73844,homework is badly designed. it covers too little materials,1
73891,"If you plan to purchase this course, enjoy, but the course isn't really free.You can watch the lectures, but you must pay to unlock the python playground. There's no real point to the course if you can't test your knowledge.",1
73914,make the other courses free,1
73941,"Hate this class, I wasted 200 bucks on this crap and now I am stuck taking it...",1
73944,"While the lectures were a little slow about providing information, they were entertaining.But I feel very mislead about the costs. The lecturer repeated over and over how everything is free but, in the end, only the first course in the series is free. Then you must pay a monthly fee in order to go on.I would not have continued with the first course if I'd known that was all there was going to be.",1
74078,Didn't learn anything new. Too much of chit chat.,1
74209,not worth your time,1
74317,"The title of this class should have read ""Programming for Anybody that already knew a decent amount about basic Programming(Continuing with Python)""",1
74946,i had technical problems with both coursers's online system and also with the 3rd party online coding tool,1
74991,Course did not meet my expectations. I would not have paid the $80 for it knowing what I know now. I also found the lectures to be not very helpful.,1
75011,Trivial course. This 7-week course can be easily completed in an hour.I learned nothing from this course that I did not already know about python.This course is strictly for beginners.,1
75440,This Course is bad! I try to ask for help and then mentors only reply with I cant help you because of the Honor code. Well tat doesn't sound like much of an honor code to me. Of course I am doing my own work duh! I just need help. Dont we all need help from time to time. I think Coursera needs a lot of improvement. I am extremely dissatisfied with Coursera and this course but especially the mentors and their lack of mentoring. Education should be uplifting and positive and an area where individuals can ask question and receive help and not be scolded for asking help or asking questions like a beat down dog. I mean really I think Coursera needs to go take some hints from a real school or university and seek information on education and how it is best when students teach each other and If I can ask for help and learn from others and give then the opportunity to help me that whats the point of a discussion board. Do away with the discussion board or change the way the honor code is written. Yes I agree with Honor and doing your own work but come on. Help and tutoring is a valuable part of education and necessary to learning! Please make the necessary changes to better Coursera and make it a more positive educational experience. I mean please I am trying the best I can with what I have got and no one seems to want to help me learn and improve on my skills and my understanding. Make changes and make them now.Another reason I hate this course Is that Coursera does not believe in people helping one another. Then the mentors cant even explain how to work through the problem. The menotrs make things more stressful than they need to be because the dont give help or hints or clues. People need to talk to people on the phone or in person or the instructor needs to give better examples so people can better figure things out on their own. I just think Coursera is crap and this has been a very unpleaseant experience for me. Then on the discussing board i see others struggling with the same things and the mentos dont help them. People are pleading for help and not receiving any guidance or direction to help them figure things out. Things need to change with this program. They need to change soon!,1
75507,"This course is way too slow and boring. I am disappointed I have paid so much for so few content here. Why a full specialisation cycle when one or two courses would probably have been more than enough ? Too much distraction as well, with ""funny"" videos that I had to pay for...",1
75641,"Very simple, very slow. For someone with programming experience it is a drug, for someone new to programing (I am thinking my son) not very captivating.",1
75675,Still canny program. 0/10,1
75915,kind of okay but...,1
76134,"Pretty bad as far as I am conerned. I spent two days clicking back and forth and listening to a lot of talk that taught me nothing. Sorry about that, but there are better courses on the Internet than this one.",1
76290,I did like this course however it is very very basic. I think it should have been merged with course 2 as the course contents are as good as one week work.,1
76519,Very slow.,1
76577,"To be honest, I thought the course stumbled and fell short. It was too basic and slow paced. The tone was a bit immature at times, and perhaps appropriate only for a grade school level classroom--not something for working professionals. And it's certainly not mature enough or challenging enough for a university class. Even if the goal were to teach those with no programming experience, it could accomplish that while providing more content, and making the content relevant.Is the course worth the price? Hell no. If you do pay, you may feel very cheated at the end. The entire course can be reduced to 3 pages of notes. One would be better off checking into other free, online tutorials.I'm not sure about the value of the videos titled ""Office Hours."" They all appeared as self-promotional behavior from the professor, as if to say, ""hey look how great I am making this video in Paris."" They're really nothing more than that. In one video, he corners a guest speaker at a conference, who appears annoyed after a few minutes and gives the professor a polite brush-off: ""other people here would like to talk with me too."" After all of these videos, you will ask yourself, ""okay, why did Severance make me watch that?"" ""What was the point?"" And you'll shrug your shoulders and say, ""another waste of time.""",1
76710,It does not worth a penny to spend time in this course.,1
76979,Poor feedback and advice with those who really do not know of programming. To shame!,1
77065,The class is very very basic for the offered price. Not suitable for someone from Computer science background looking to learn Python as this can be done with couple of hours of self study. Not sure why Coursera would make such begginers class mandatory for the specialization.,1
77731,"Only for those who are new to everything involving computers. If you know how to turn your own computer off and on, look for a more advanced course than this.",1
77800,This course has been dumbed down so much that no moderately intelligent person should be subjected to it. Coursera really needs to rethink its approach to teaching. I can only express my sympathy for those were seduced into actually paying for this course.,1
78186,Way to easy,1
78203,too slow,1
78427,We tried to use this class to teach a brown bag lunch for our employees interested in programming. Python is a great language but this class has a very low content to volume ratio (nobody wants to watch the instructor meet his life-time idol at a trade-show or watch the Intel versus AMD melt-down commercials over their lunch break).,1
78511,"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 :(",1
78647,"This is not a start, at the end of the course, you still can't use python. And even the tools don't work properly.",1
78758,"The ""professor"" spews the material like reading poetry. The material is disorganized jumping from one topic to another and back. The quizzes are just plain dumb containing questions like ""what article was written by authors x, y, z"". The homework is barely related to the material and one of them, the one that made me abandon wasting further time with this class consists of wasting a huge amount of time (days) configuring parameters and running an application over and over again to tune them(waiting up to ten minutes on my i7 machine to make one pass over the data). My impression is that this guy didn't spend any time to prepare this course and just used the material/homework from a more advanced class that he did previously. You will not learn almost anything by taking this class, as none of the topics is explained well and is the opposite of self contained. Just a huge waste of time...",1
78967,There were key definitions and concepts that were stated wrong in this course. Please read the student forum for details.,1
78968,Speed is very fast for a basic level student. The data explanation and correlation demonstrated is not clear.,1
79062,There's no point in auditing the course since you don't get access to the answers,1
79070,"thanks for your effort to make videos, but this is the first time find a class that i can not submit my answer to check if it is correct or not before my account is upgraded. Disappoint to Coursera and Duke.",1
79181,"The course has a very important content. But I believe that it could improve it's quality, develop better slides, the teacher could be more dynamic.Other features like innovative assignments based on real life, partnerships with companies to provide content, and everything that could be a differential to the course will be awesome.",1
79184,"Very basic, and only scratching the surface of a much larger topic.",1
79188,Lack of insights and practical information,1
79191,"I'm sorry to say this Course is really boring, poor in resources and I'm sorry to say this but it's the worse Coursera Course I've attended .",1
79217,"Too base for experienced people, not enough fundamental for beginners.After 2 weeks didn't find any useful information, it also very boring, so recommend to see video on 1.25 -1.5 speed.The course need to be significantly changed:1. Who are the target audience2. How many resources do we have (time etc)3. What we would see as a result of course (knowledge, skills (hard, soft)etc.",1
79237,The course is not very useful due to its lacking of practical examples and assignments.,1
79269,Boring and not that useful...,1
79302,The material was way to dry. Could not get interested in this class,1
79331,"This was not really a course, but a person talking in front of camera some jibber jabber and not much to learn from these talks at all. If this was a way for Kimberley to increase her brand presence it did not go well. Talks were short with no real matter in them fill with jokes just to make time with them. I am sorry I did wait until the last lecture hoping that something will come out of it.",1
79343,"Very poor quality...The ""teacher"" is talking and talking without saying anything concrete or giving some tools or practical suggestions.",1
79344,"Not even sure it worth one star, all due respect.",1
79406,Poor quality videos make the course less appealing and make it seems to be unprofessional,1
79414,Background is not clear and not able to understand lecture,1
79489,Not so helpful. This generation already is familiar with everything taught here. Withdrawing the Honor Code Certification is so unethical. Not going to take any courses from Coursera from now on.,1
79634,Didn't learn anything.,1
79644,Lacks of subtitles. Very disappointed,1
79653,"This course is good to improve the listening skills, but the note taking is really boring, because it is focused in only one method, the Conell Note, This disregards individual differences, and I don´t think this method is the best for me.",1
79666,"Это не курс, а набор эзотерических, бездоказательных практик, которые способен придумать для себя даже школьник. Учителя Павла Кочкина, о которых сам он с гордостью рассказывает - Норбеков и Лапин. Псевдоученый с псевдостепенями и тантрист. Это Курсера?!This is not a course for Coursera! It's a shame that this kind of non-scientific blabber found its way onto this platform. The techniques Pavel Kochkin is promoting are basic to say the least. His teachers are a known quack and a tantrist. And Pavel himself is proudly telling his story of how he lied his way into a job for which he had no skills. He's giving false definitions to 'personality' and 'intrinsic/extrinsic motivation'. He's confident, he's got presentation and cute animation, but his message is just as quack as his teachers! I am shocked and disgusted. And on top of that there's A LOT of self-advertisement and links to Pavel's online courses.It's a shame MEPhE put its label on this course. It's tragic that Coursera swallowed it as well.",1
79683,"The professor teaches by reading the slides and does not even bother to explain the concepts. The course contents might be interesting, but now I'm dropping this course because they are not explaining any concepts but are just giving facts to memorize.",1
79692,"Course is overwhelming. How can you put a 30 minute video for a class? Can you divide it or make it simpler? Tutor is not explaning, he only reads; he reads sort of teleprompter and that's it. Boring. Very disappointed. And this is not my first course in Coursera. I feel I'm about to quit, and this is the second week...",1
79698,"The titles are interesting and curious to read, but the language is presentation of ideas is not coherent. The teacher does not provide practical techniques that can be used by a startup for marketing . I wish there were many more examples given and an applicable technique presented, that I could use as an entrepreneur.",1
79742,"Very very long lectures with ambiguous content. Many information provided are inaccurate, and the course doesn't teach neither programming concepts for beginners, nor high or even intermediate training for other developers.In my opinion, It's a waste of time.",1
79745,"Peer review assignments are too hand-held, making the assignments themselves worthless.",1
79901,No factual tools !,1
80172,"Very through introduction course, very helpful for those who are preparing for PMP exam .",1
80249,"This is purely subjective, but I could not keep myself awake and sustain interest long enough to finish the one section I paid for. I guess I should have tried one for free first...I tried to tell the Coursera staff to remove the course from my list and that I did not need my refund, but sadly, it sits on my 'enrolled courses' list, perhaps permanently until I cancel my account. Luckily, I did figure out how to turn off the almost twice daily notifications.",1
80287,This class is taught a terrible pace and is very old-school in it's thinking. It was pretty painful to get through actually,1
80517,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.,1
80627,The Professor is very slow and boring.,1
80693,"Poor content, only a book accompanies the videos and we should not be forced to buy anything!",1
80717,"Not very well organized course to teach the essential principles of negotiation. The course material moves incongruently between legal and business negotiation tactics, which would make it difficult for any untrained future negotiator to understand the art of negotiation and ADR for business and law.",1
81001,"Very little participation so very little help to be found on the forums, and from what I can tell, absolutely zero staff participation. After a couple weeks it's looking like a waste of money.",1
81028,"Professor speaks too slowly most of the time but then quickly glosses over complicated equations without much explanation of what the equation is or what the variables are or labeling the equations (he has multiple equations on one slide when talking). Some videos are 2 minutes, some are 11 minutes. Quizzes are exceedingly simple - 10 questions with only two possible answers each. 100% of the time, there is at least 1 question with the wrong answer. There have been no TAs to help answer questions or to rectify these wrong answers. All the while, Coursera keeps asking if I want to pay $45 to verify for this course. Ha!! You have to be joking. This class was disappointing. You'd almost be better off reading Wikipedia articles or a book.",1
81081,"Really dreadful: absurdly fast progress, with really dry graphics, where they cover the history of economics in about 30 minutes! To make things worse, the lecturer (who doesn't appear in the videos) speaks incredibly fast, while graphs and bullet point lists fly by on the screen. There's not time to process the information and complicated terms and processes are explained in just a few seconds.I'm disappointed as it looked like an interesting course but doesn't live up to some of the really great courses available which employ great teaching and delivery.",1
81085,"I have been quite disappointed by this class. There were no suggested readings in addition to the quite basic videos. But the worst were the quizzs. 90% of the answers to the multiple-choice questions were the top option!! I could have pass the tests without having listen to the videos. Were those tests or jokes? You should do this class only if you know absolutely nothing about economics, because this is the most basic class.",1
81286,"If this class is truly designed and welcomes beginners who have no knowledge in SEO as it is described in course introduction, assignment instructions should be provided with sample writings or rubrics. The writing assignment instruction reads,for example, ""Identify headers, alt-text, and etc. and recommend how to improve them for optimization."" Where does it say provide alt-text images for recommendation, make a tie to the recommendation, and list references for the images recommend, if not 3 points off? The lectures are short, doesn't show much details of what is expected for audit writing or analysis writing, but my 2 page analysis or audit is not enough because a thorough rubric expects to see this and that that is not even mentioned in instruction? It is a common sense that a writer has to be detail-oriented with recommendations? Then the course SHOULD not encourage SEO beginners who has never seen SEO audits or analysis paper. If not, assignment instruction should be listed thoroughly as rubric, so that a beginner SEO student can pass the writing and take it as a learning experiences. Endless flunking mal-grading system, is this Coursera's education method?",1
81326,"Very boring, not engaging at all. uses the phrase ""you know"" and ""um"" too much",1
81372,No longer a entirely FREE course.All courses that require you to upgrade to submit quiz answers should be noted in the information about the course! I imagine you are loosing more and more people due to this. Once again greed takes precedence.,1
81404,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.,1
81421,"Cannot do the tests after modules, no reply from staff.",1
81429,"I dropped out of this course twice is coz i found it absolutely dead. It says positive psychology but it really look so much constraint to even watch the first 3 videos without falling asleep. This is probably the worse course I've studied on coursera. I have studied at least 7 courses on Coursera- of which I loved Social Psychology and Criminal, and I even paid for the certificates. This course literally killed me.... The worst EVER I've come across",1
81438,Should state up front that there is no auditing. Unable to continue this course without Upgrading.,1
81505,The course was not what I wanted,1
81509,It was too slow,1
81574,"Superficial treatment of the subject matter. Presentation was awkward and slow, and at times condescending in tone. This whole course is equivalent to a 2 hour seminar on ""How to live more positively"" presented at local community centre. It is not university level learning - instead it seems glib and lacking in substance.",1
81601,Boring,1
81720,Great title of lection but their content's scarce,1
81748,"The concept of the course is excellent--short videos, quizzes, activity. The execution is extremely poor--the short quizzes often do not emphasize the elements focused upon in the video OR ask questions addressed in the next video (not the one just viewed) OR address issues that are not raised at all in this particular course (but issues from other courses in the specialization). One is penalized for being late with assignments and must shift to a new session if one is late. The weekly tests are absolutely ridiculous--they ask questions requiring the application of concepts which were barely covered, concepts which were not reviewed, or which require real world knowledge which cannot be assumed for someone who has no experience in this field.",1
81772,It is too basic,1
81773,Totally disappointed!,1
81824,It's really not good this course told us a very basic things never give us deep detail and in most of course it shows us the code and you should write like this but there is no deep understand what is it,1
81872,"Only shows a bit of javascript, css, and html snippets. If you expect to learn from this course, dont bother they mostly refer you to w3schools.com. They assume everyone knows how to code in html, javascript and css. At one point in the course the teacher says, if you don't know: Google, Yahoo,etc., but if you are going to have to google 99% of things, it's pointless taking this course.",1
81949,Course content is way too easy and inadequate to do any useful work.,1
82010,"Very low level , im sorry but this cant be even considered a good intro to HTML,CSS im going to stop wasting my time watching this.no chllange in the assignments or questions , + more of an overview of the basics then the basics ..",1
82025,"so i will give one star because the title is misleading. I was expecting a course about responsive UI for website. But is yet again a basic introduction to HTML, CSS and JavaScript.",1
82192,"It's very simple presentation for the topic. I believe that coursera is a Professional site for learners. So , I don't think people who visit this site don't know these basic rules. I mean what is to, CC, subject or stuff like these. I thought, the course give us more specific materials that we able to use when we write an email, for example, inside of the mail what rules we have to consider or what words or Word structures we should use.",1
82198,the coarse needs a lot of improvement for the explaining way and the data offered way,1
82210,"This is not a business course. Explaining what an email is, and how to send attachments is completely irrelevant information.The title of the course should be more appropriate - Introduction to email, what is it and how to use it. Or something that gives people the idea that the course is about very basic information about emails.",1
82258,"I wouldn't pay $49.00 Dlls. for this course, nor the other courses within this specialization. This one contains quite a lot of errors. There's a lack of domain of the matter by the instructor and some concepts are poorly explain and incorrectly defined. It's quite a shame that this course is in behalf the UMAN's name :(. Hope this course gets upgraded",1
82260,Needs to pay for submit assignments,1
82278,Files used were for an older version of Meteor.js which made installing the application and doing the assignment really confusing . Help was not forthcoming and I eventually unsubscribed from the course,1
82291,"This is not a course for beginners, even though you go through all previous the courses.There is no interaction at all with the professors or tutors.The Projects are evaluated by your own Classmates.",1
82505,"Very poorly presented course. Despite having completed quite a number of coursera courses before, and even being already familiar with a good deal of the preliminary material in this one, i soon abandoned it due to the inadequate and scrappily prepared presentation of material. Mercedes Paniccia in particular speaks in a virtually unintelligible expressionless monotone with no explanation or elaboration to relieve what amounts to little more than a list of definitions and bald statements such as can be found in the glossary section of many textbooks. I would strongly recommend finding an alternative course devoted to the subject or maybe seeking out a readable textbook.",1
82507,"It must be taught by someone who can speak english clearly. Sorry but I couldn't understand what Mercedes Paniccia spoke, which made the course even more difficult to understand. There are subtitles but it's not possible for everyone to put that much effort. This issue must be taken seriously to make this MOOC much better.",1
82609,To lock a quiz for payment is mean.,1
82805,"In fact, this is an inconsistent attempt of re-implementing previous FRP course from the same authors. FRP course had many issues about homework/lectures being poorly related, this one is even worse. This is very frustrating, as a topic itself is one of the most interesting ones in today's software engineering.",1
82823,Too much reuse of old material (assignments as well as lectures).,1
82848,"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",1
82849,Arguments that sound very unconvincing and unscientific.,1
82852,"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.",1
82853,I felt more like I was part of some experiment to see how long I could tolerate boredom than that I was in class where someone was trying to share knowledge with me. Needless to say I did not make it to the end which is sad because I was genuinely interested in the content. The instructor's delivery was absolutely monotone and he did not seem to emphasize the key points in any way so I found it very difficult to retain any information or to even stay awake at times.,1
82860,I am dropping this course as it is too elementary. I had hoped for something at a more advanced university level.,1
83000,The professor was very goodbut there is a lot of assignments !!!a lot of record videos !!! every week !!! and the assignments it was very long for example 20 instruction for every assignment it is very boringmany people don't like record videos it is a bad idea,1
83042,It is impossible to submit quizes and programming assignments without purchasing the course. In my view this defies the goal of Coursera to provide accessible education anywhere in the world!,1
83049,"Superficial coverage of quiz and final exam material in the video lectures. Without getting the textbook and reading it in depth, it is difficult to do well in this class.",1
83081,to much math,1
83136,Some exercises need some improvement. Tests were not that helpful and the instruction to the last homework was quite bad (many open questions).,1
83137,"Rather theoretical introduction to the basics of an interesting subject. Regretfully examples and assignments are frequently overly complex in areas which are unrelated to the subject. In addition, people who work with software development should expect to look further if they aim to add to their toolbox.",1
83163,Academical with close to no real life value.,1
83234,"I don't mean to be harsh, but this course is increibly boring and sluggish. The reading material is heavy, the lecturers speak so slowly and dispassionately that it's impossible to engage with the subject.I'm sure that there is really good content here, but I couldn't find it.",1
83235,Really excellent materials and links but spoiled by typos on the videos and in the quiz questions. I'm sure some of the quiz answers conflicted with what had been said in the videos.,1
83250,"Of all the courses I have ever taken in my BA, MA, PhD, and MBA coursework, this was the worse. This is a tragically BAD course. No learning outcomes discussed, and the ""teaching"" is sort of mumbling while underlining and reading slides that are WAY TOO complicated and crowded. Just awful. Mistakes in quizzes and exams, frequent misspellings, low effort. One ""instructor"" Ms Mayer simply reads the slides, line by line. THAT is not teaching. Please learn how to teach and interact with your students. U of Minn should be ashamed of this course, and provide some training on how to run a distance learning course to its instructors. As it is, the course is disappointing on every level. To top it off, the instructor has the nerve to show off his boat and tell us how rich he is.... Blech. Poor taste.",1
83352,"Excellent teaching, but it's not actually free. You must pay in order to access the assignments and the professor's in-browser python sandbox.",1
83361,"The introduction is nice, but the problem is the homework design. If homework doesn't cover too much of what people learnt in class, it is easy to forget materials in class.",1
83382,make the other ones free,1
83502,too,1
83548,"Instructor, Dr. Chuck, is terrific. However, assignments are incredibly difficult. You are supposed to spend no matter than a few hours a week on the course. I spent over 100 hours alone on the assignments. The mentors that are supposed to help you did not help at all. Very poorly put together second module that does not prepare you to complete the assignments",1
83945,Too basic for programers,1
84089,It has too many bugs.,1
84266,Totally not worth having the certificates.Easy assignments.Good for people who never programmed before.,1
84267,Way too easy assignments. Only good for people who never did any kind of programming. For the rest it's not worth the money.,1
84342,It does not touch Hash table or Stack. Just the common data type in python.,1
84531,"No teaching. Just a guy talking. Do the problem sets for practice. If you need help, pause the videos and try the code out yourself.Seriously though, a programming course where the teacher is not actively type out the code but just scribbling around it. He doesn't work through code but talks around the concepts.",1
85241,Very poor Server capacity. Problematic to complete assignments,1
85289,"Had I taken this course without prior knowledge of the subject, without a doubt I would have quit the course after the first lesson. As it is, I gladly clicked the unenroll button after 5 mins into the start of the instructor's week three video. I honestly don't know why I bothered to continue torturing myself as long as I did.John Holbo makes grasping Plato more complicated than it needs to be. In fact, his lessons are nothing more than useless 'white noise' and ill attempts at humour.I recommend NOT taking this course. It does not offer any enlightenment, but will only obfuscate and turn people off from wanting to understand Plato.",1
85320,"The lectures are very good, but the course administrators forgot to proof read the quizzes. Evidently some questions have been deleted and the result is complete nonsense. the lectures are worth listening to, and I did that with some interest, but as a course, the administrators have failed.",1
85336,"not what I thought it would be, based on the intro",1
85391,a little boring. I spent lots of time on learning on an useless language rather than learning the spirit of functional programming. I suppose to use C/C++\python or other normal programming language as the lesson language.,1
85485,"I did all four courses - the whole specialization. Each course in itself was aright and I learned new things. However, the course certificate is meaningless. It neither states the content nor the effort (for example the hours). Instead, it even says ""non-credit course"". This is despite the fact that the course equates ""35 PDU's"" and ""counts towards the UCI Project Management Certificate Programm""; as it was described in the FAQ. I feel betrayed. How can I apply with such a meaningless peace of paper anywhere?",1
85574,"I've started the course and i have found ""learn to program"" part, but where is ""quality code""?",1
85588,"I was very excited by the topic of this course, but quite disappointed when I finally started it.The content of this course has little to do with its promising title.In fact. the content lacks any coherency. There is no logical development of the course content - it's all disconnected facts told one after another.Another factor is the delivery. I know the teachers are Italians & English is not their first language and that is fine. But they are just reading out the content - that's all. They are just passively reading the content from somewhere so it is hard to concentrate because the interactivity value is zero and their accent takes some time to get used to.Both content and delivery of this course were disappointing even though I was (and am) really, really interested in this topic.",1
85591,"Interesting subject matter, but difficult to understand as a native English speaker. Very awkwardly worded and error-ridden tests.",1
85603,"Horrific. If I could rate this ZERO I would. The instructor will give you a one sentence explanation and definition for a term (literally, I downloaded the transcripts to help with my notes and assignments) and then say, ""Now that we learned x..."" and fly right into the next term. Worse, many of the sentences don't even make sense and completely incoherrant, even in the written transcript. I am having to go out and find additional textbooks to research the basic definitions of what is required to pass the course. There is even less explanation of real-world applications, examples, and demonstration. It is almost as though she tried to memorize a sheet of definitions and repeated them without the use of her notes. This results in a highly monotonous monologue with awkward gestures and little actual content. I was planning on going for the PR for Digital Media Certification, but I can't handle another course like this. It's a waste of time and money.",1
85609,"Unfortunately, this is a poorly designed course. It seems like it is strictly scripted, the instructor looks like she's reading the material. It's very boring to watch. And as a student with a business background, I learned zero things related to PR or research. Everything discussed through this course is nothing beyond definitions and general business knowledge. She keeps hinting on discussing the topics further in different section (Which didn't happen) this leaves me confused on why not discussing its details now?! Discussing SWOT analysis is a strategic concern, and as a PR related course we should see more related to marketing and communication techniques as a result of the search. But guess what? its not there... This course Is not worth the money.",1
85632,"Except the fact that it was taught well, I believe that pressuring people work with a specific program to pass a course is not helpful. I believe that instead of learning how to handle PRO TOOLS from scratch you should change the course to something more creative like recording different instruments, measuring the studio space, monitors and much more helpful things than advertise and make AVID richer.FriendlyAll the best",1
85661,"The reason why I gave one star is because I don't think its content is completely related to its title. This course is very similar to music production but using only pro tools.If you are looking to learn more about music production using pro tools, then this is an awesome course but if you already have some background in music production and you just want to learn pro tools basics, then I don't think this is an appropriate course (in my opinion).",1
85720,The first three weeks are totally trivial. I hardly doubt that anyone learns something except how certain practices are called. (Maybe good for school students.) Week 4 is better. I recommend the lecturer to improve the previous weeks and to redistribute some of the contents of week four. Some real-world examples which point out typical mistakes or give useful hints would be welcome in the first three weeks as well.,1
85748,"It's a shame that almost all courses are to be paid for nowadays. For one, I am not paying for it, many will follow...",1
85775,"Learned very little. Doesn't actually teach anything, but gives some tips by talking, the stuff that you can find by using google and clicking on the first link that appears. Some material gets repeated throughout the course. Quizzes are a joke really.",1
85846,Impossible to navigate to the course material. Took my payment but insists on another payment before it will let me submit an assignment. Very frustrating. I am about to request a refund.,1
85852,Very basic,1
85858,Very basic. I guess if you have no education or experience its good.,1
86056,I think it could be funnier...,1
86119,"Instructor seems uninterested or bored. Sometimes he only reads the slides without adding anything else to the content. Others, he goes quickly through a slide without any time to digest the information. Overall, intro level concepts are ok, but specifics about creation or handling of tools is left without deeper explanation",1
86145,Not very useful.,1
86152,Not much Interesting plus low level of difficulty,1
86210,"The professor did not Interact with people, I was wiling to see some discussions and contributions among people",1
86253,very redundant and lacks diversity,1
86276,water on the mill,1
86290,one of the most boring courses I have ever taken.....I had to force myself to finish it. the teacher is charismatic but the content is just theories and abstract ideas.....just blah blah blah,1
86355,Just reading. There are not videos.You are not allowed to submit the quiz if you do not pay.,1
86431,Very poor that in order to submit any exam I have to purchase the course when I can download the book and learn as well.,1
86520,"This course is garbage. The instruction videos are fine, but the assignments are imprecise in their language at times, and there are certain key points needed to complete them that aren't covered in the videos. The mentor in the forums is lousy, and his responses are worded as if he's talking with a peer and not a beginner/student.I may or may not try another coursera course after this. But if this experience is any indication, Coursera isn't very good. The same UofM course appears over on Udemy, and I wonder if it is just being repurposed on as many platforms as possible without the care needed to make sure it works.",1
86668,"I am running Firefox v50 on Ubuntu Linux v16.04. I was unable to watch any of the lecture videos due to the page reloading every 2 - 10 seconds. I tried moving to a different video with the same results. I don't know if this is UC Davis-specific or whether Coursera has changed significantly since the last time I took a class, but this course is totally unusable.I would have left this review with Coursera rather than as a course review, but Coursera doesn't make contact information easy to locate.",1
86720,"I thought the content layout for Courses 1 and 2 were okay. However, when I got to Course 3: Using Python to Access Web Data, I was extremely disappointed. This specialization is advertised as one does not require programming experience. Course 3, however, introduces a variety of computer science topics that I believe cause information overload for a beginner. A student is bombarded with information about regular expressions, the HTTP protocol, web sockets, URLs, HTML, XML, JSON, and APIs. In fact, the video lectures spend the majority of the time explaining these concepts, while spending very little time explaining how to use Python to access web data. The corresponding book, Python for Informatics, was of little help understanding the assignments. Like the videos, the book lacks sufficient numbers of examples. The few examples that are given lack adequate explanations of the code they contain. I found myself on many occasions asking, ""What exactly does this line or block of code do?"", and could not locate the answer. If not for the forum, I would not have been able to complete th",1
86747,Very poor course... You can pass it in a one day even if you never program Python.,1
86933,"I only received 96% as a final result, even though I obtained 100% for every assignment. Pathetic rating system. If I had paid for this course I would be incensed.",1
87018,"Unfortunately on the whole I was very disappointed with this class. I took the first two Python courses and found them manageable, but this third one was an unrealistic increase in difficulty from the previous two. I reached out for help on the discussion board a number of times and saw many others were struggling as well. Mentors who responded to some of the other students were clearly getting defensive when those students were getting nowhere on the assignments. I think this program should reevaluate itself so students such as me can keep up with the assignments. On average I was spending about 10 hours per week just on the syntax for building the programs.A little about my background: I have 20 years of experience in the private sector and am currently an analyst in cyber security. I have an undergraduate degree in finance, an MBA, and another master’s degree in Data Analytics. This 5 course program has been described and sold as beginner level, and given my background I should have handily been able to complete it, but that was definitely not the case. Normally I don’t leave feedback unless I feel strongly about something, so I hope you take it seriously. Thanks.",1
87249,"The pedagogy of this course is disappointing because of a lack of sequential instruction. Large gaps exist: explanations of syntax and conceptualization of how the data flows seem incomplete. I have looked at all kinds of documentation as well as the book, but I cannot find what I need to know, and this a barrier to completing the assignments. The instructor's videos have shown me very little of what I need to understand the concepts. The examples show at most 20% (that is just a guess, it is probably less) of the knowledge that I need to complete the assignments. When I ask questions on the forums, the first word I think when I read mentors' explanations is ""cryptic.""",1
87307,"Took the first two courses which were fine but this one started off poorly and just got worse, unfortunately. I'm wondering if I can get my money back.",1
87316,"No teaching. Just a guy talking and sometimes complaining about imaginary students' hypothetical thoughts. Do the problem sets for practice. If you need help, pause the videos and try the code out yourself.Seriously though, a programming course where the teacher is not actively type out the code but just scribbling around it. He doesn't work through code but talks around the concepts.",1
87385,I'm getting coursera verification prompts too often. This doesn't happen in any of the other courses I've taken/I'm taking,1
87883,Confusing. No help. Poorly presented.,1
87971,The accents of the instructors make it difficult to understand the material,1
88023,"Sorry, the guy in the first video doesn't blink, which is very weird. The second video was so incredibly dry and boring that I completely lost interest. I know this could be a fascinating course with the proper videos and visuals to help people understand it.",1
88090,"The course was very nice and useful and the explanations were very good!The biggest problem of this course was that it required to be purchased in order to unlock the quizzes and the assignments. I don't know who decided to do this (the organizers of this course or Coursera) but I don't think it was a good idea.I was not interested (and I am sure I am not the only one) in receiving a certificate. I just wanted to learn and to test the acquired knowledge.I realize that it is impossible to improve this project without any money, but you can obtain the needed money from other sources (donations, sponsorships) without affecting those who want to learn. Event that the access to the video was not restricted (thus, many knowledge can still be acquired by those who want), the assignments have their important role in the learning process.I saw that I am not the only one who mentioned in the feedbacks the purchasing problem for this course. I hope that these feedbacks will be taken into account and the things will be changed for the next editions of this course.To sum up, the information from this course and the manner of providing this, deserves 5 stars. Because of the purchasing issue, I am giving only one star.",1
88092,"This course was supposed to be the last one before capstone and what did we learn:· Nothing about electronic· Huge amount about networking on very basic level – question is what are people without this knowledge at all doing in IoT course· How you can tweet from Raspberry Pi (hey, is somebody crazy here)· Lot of words about camera, few minutes about servo motor and that’s all.We have to write a web server update which is completely unexplained and no one didn’t do it because no one understood it that way (despite the fact that webserver is webserver and server is server) and during whole course no one update the task definitionThere is no discussion board, it was turned off during earlier courses and for me only explanation is that no one from UCI doesn’t care and the certificate for course cost $80-$90.Very pathetic approach which I can only explain with 2 words: “Easy money”",1
88103,"Coursera changed the rules on access to graded quizzes in the middle of this specialization. The last course in the specialization allowed free access to graded quizzes and homework.During this course, the ""free access"" to quizzes and assignments is no longer an option.Even more annoying is the fact that I also receive email reminding me to ""complete the quiz"", which would require me to upgrade to a paid enrollment to allow me to submit assignments to grading.Thanks for nothing, Coursera!",1
88112,"No option of completing the course without paying. So why do you call your site FREE online courses? And why do we have to go into the trouble of attending the class and watching the videos, and reading the material without being capable of at least watching our results in assignments?",1
88128,"A lot of powerpoint, nothing else.",1
88134,Just overview of the common technologies. Useless course,1
88144,Putting some numbers on the slide without any explanation of how it works. Only saying what it does.Reading almost only his slide without further information.No basic formulas such as eg. Shannon theorem...,1
88146,so easy,1
88151,There was basically nothing in it. He only repeated the points in the presentation! No explaining just throwing around numbers.,1
88187,"If you call reading the PowerPoint presentations a course, then don't miss the chance and enroll here !",1
88197,i need practical information but this video was full of tables,1
88254,This is a gigantic waste of time,1
88270,I'm not able to submit my assignments,1
88289,"I did all four courses - the whole specialization. Each course in itself was aright and I learned new things. However, the course certificate is meaningless. It neither states the content nor the effort (for example the hours). Instead, it even says ""non-credit course"". This is despite the fact that the course equates ""35 PDU's"" and ""counts towards the UCI Project Management Certificate Programm""; as it was described in the FAQ. I feel betrayed. How can I apply with such a meaningless peace of paper anywhere?",1
88300,"the peer review was a waste of time, some individuals submit whatever other review whatever; I found that the assessment criteria is not based on evaluating the quality of performed work, and therefore have not really learned much from the capstone project. I am taking another course which as well has peer review, I am rethinking if it's worth it.... do not see any value, there is no real feedback from instructor. If I need it a peer review, I could just ask my colleagues at work.",1
88412,Very bad introduction to Python and almost nothing about Raspberry Pi itself.,1
88640,i hope to learn more how you wrote the code in class.,1
88719,"I thought this was poor. It was basically a re-hash of the previous module with slightly different tasks. Given that I had to wait three months for the capstone to be ready, I found it a bit rich that my deadline to finish it was a couple of weeks! Don't waste your money/time on this particular module.",1
88733,I expected something else.,1
88744,"If this entire specialization were a bag of potato chips, the Capstone would be that bland chip that didn't get any salt.The introduction to the Capstone promises that we'll ""build applications"" utilizing what we've learned so far with optional assignments for delving deeper. However, none of the required assignments involve even the most primitive of problem solving skills or code writing abilities. If you can download a file and take a screenshot then you've got what it takes to pass this class.The optional assignments are far too focused around a new piece of video sharing technology that the instructor and associates have developed. Unfortunately, the technology adds almost nothing beneficial to the class and is probably to blame for the sheer lack of quality in the rest of the class.In fact, the entire Capstone feels like it was so haphazardly put together that it can only be described as the most contrived beta-test I've ever been a part of. Such a disappointing ending to what was otherwise an enjoyable specialization.",1
88947,During lessons you don`t receive enough information to be able to pass the exams,1
89017,You do not know what you are getting into until you take the first class. What happen to the delete button on the class.l,1
89086,"I didn't find the overall content of the course very well chosen for an introduction to philosophy - since it covers so little. The title of this course should have been ""An Introduction to Just a Couple of Topics in Philosophy."" And there are so few philosophers covered. However, the biggest problem was instructorAlasdair Richmond, whose response to debate was locking threads down every time his ideological positions were challenged. He showed himself completely inept to have a debate with more than one course participant and chose to censor a variety of viewpoints he dislikes. It was particularly ironic to see an instructor exercise censorship in a Philosophy course - a domain whose objective, after all, is the pursuit of truth as well as to ask and debate the ""why"" of everything! A petty tyrant does not make a good teacher.Should I ever meet anyone interested in studying Philosophy, my first recommendation to them will be stay away from the University of Edinburgh, since there is no respect for debate, freedom of expression, or inquiry there.",1
89091,The pronunciation of the lectors is more than awful! Their English is quite unsuitable for video lectures! So I quit the course. It is just a torture listening to them!,1
89111,简直是毫无帮助。作业根本提交不了，无法通过的。It's a waste of time.,1
89112,No instructor participates in discussion. No one ever passes the programming assignment because it won't accept any answer.,1
89113,"bad useless garbage,this is the most bad online course i've take,just waste time",1
89127,The last homework si quite a difficult spike. Way too complicated for beginners.,1
89135,"The course starts with a short introduction on the topic of usability and user experience. A good idea, but not very well presented.Next is an intro to bootstrap. OK, but not deep enough for a course called ""Responsive Web Design"".The last two weeks cover JavaScript. Or more precisely: they cover a few JavaScript libraries.To sum it up, the course could really use a revision. There are too many mistakes in the examples and sometimes, the instructors look a bit unprepared and confused.",1
89182,Thanks Dr Matthew you're the bestMr Marco I didn't understand anything from you and I stopped the course because I dropped this module because of you. I'm sorry,1
89311,"The course poorly understands the scientific method, and its main effort is to wield unconvincing critiques of science so as to elevate the status of religion in general and Creationism in particular. The last set of lectures is also just badly executed, a confusing meandering talk that amounts to nothing. The course did have a few bright points, like the second series of lectures explaining varieties of naturalism, but overall the course was just bad. Avoid this course, you can learn much more from other sources.",1
89313,"I have always been appreciative of free courses that are provided by universities, but this course is clearly biased. The sophistry present in the final module is particularly dishonest. A university is meant to teach the whole story, and have a truthful account of facts. I am deeply disappointed that so much fallacious content could be distributed to individuals, on the pretext of unbiased learning. This course clearly has an agenda. I hope those who take it think critically about the subject matter and do their best to weed out what is reasonable and what is not.",1
89318,"This course is clearly signposted as being supported by the Templeton Foundation and it shows. The course is short in terms of length and weak in the terms of developing ideas. The designers do not seem to understand properly what science is and what scientists do. This is particularly evident in the final week, an incoherent ramble. The course strengthens my positive opinions of Feynman's view of the philosophy of science.In general. I enjoy Edinburgh University's Coursera courses, but I shall be wary of any of a similar ilk and certainly won't buy the certificate this time.",1
89333,It is a poor propaganda for religious. It even claims that creationism should be regarded as a viable alternative to evolution!,1
89351,"- In this course, using python 2.x- The whole course in Chinese, no English subtitles- There are no additional materials or information- There is nothing - only the Chinese",1
89353,Need English Version Please,1
89354,There is no subtitles in English for the video lectures and the slides are in Chinese.,1
89360,This Course is not really free. You must pay to access quizzes and peer graded assignments.Coursera is really moving downhill quickly in terms of free course offerings. It's such a pity.,1
89434,"I have done the course but I didn't get my certificate yet for reasons that I don,t know.",1
89435,Abstract when the assignment is related to psychology. Could you give us some not that professional articles?The whole course is not designed in a clear and logic way. Overwhelmed with so many terms without clear explanations.,1
89438,"When you are late in delivery, they tell you ""everything is fine, do not worry, you have until the last week of the course to complete the activity, get your note and end of the course."" They'll repeat over and over again in every week. My course ended on May 15, but they have not let me present my last activity, May 3 even before the final exam. They have forced me to leave the current session, still unfinished deadlines, missing a single activity after two months of work, and enroll again in the next session, which still nor has begun, delaying all the planning I had made for the entire course and all terms of the following courses.In short, disastrous system to keep deadlines and complete the courses that make it totally useless any planning you have to do to set the course for the months that suit you, which, in my case at least, may at risk which I can complete the full specialization before the deadline. Money thrown away.",1
89439,"Excellent lectures, good tests, too many peer evaluations!",1
89640,"If what you want is the sort of doctrinaire overview of fine-art photography that you might have learned in a university in the 1970s, this is exactly the course for you!It's thoroughly saturated with the Museum of Modern Art mindset: the assumptions and interpretations are those touted by MoMA curators, and the photographers are chosen from the MoMA-approved pantheon. (The quiz questions tend to focus on course-content minutiae -- ""Which commentator said X about Y?"" -- to make sure you've drunk your art-establishment Kool-Aid.)On the other hand, if you want to examine the diversity of photography through a variety of critical approaches -- Marxist, feminist, queer-theory, post-structural, whatever -- well, they don't allow none of that there here. This is strictly the Photography Gospel According to MoMA, and you either like it or lump it.",1
89644,"No actual class, just for selling books.",1
89776,"repetitive content with other MOMA courses (modern art&idea)?? duh, not gonna pay $50 for this. :(",1
89779,"Please be advised that this course is not structured as a rigorous close reading, but a general invitation into some central sentiments of the Book of Zhuangzi. Perhaps not the kind of course you are looking for in replacement of a serious college-level class that surveys the book.",1
89937,"For a beginners course I would expect more exercises about the different control structures and built-in mechanisms in Python. This course did not really provide a good story to follow through but jumped around between loops, inputs, number conversions, file I/O and so forth.",1
89944,One could learn as much from any of many texts. This course does not add value,1
89955,the video is too long!,1
89975,i hope to learn more how you wrote the code in class.,1
90054,"I thought this was poor. It was basically a re-hash of the previous module with slightly different tasks. Given that I had to wait three months for the capstone to be ready, I found it a bit rich that my deadline to finish it was a couple of weeks! Don't waste your money/time on this particular module.",1
90068,I expected something else.,1
90079,"If this entire specialization were a bag of potato chips, the Capstone would be that bland chip that didn't get any salt.The introduction to the Capstone promises that we'll ""build applications"" utilizing what we've learned so far with optional assignments for delving deeper. However, none of the required assignments involve even the most primitive of problem solving skills or code writing abilities. If you can download a file and take a screenshot then you've got what it takes to pass this class.The optional assignments are far too focused around a new piece of video sharing technology that the instructor and associates have developed. Unfortunately, the technology adds almost nothing beneficial to the class and is probably to blame for the sheer lack of quality in the rest of the class.In fact, the entire Capstone feels like it was so haphazardly put together that it can only be described as the most contrived beta-test I've ever been a part of. Such a disappointing ending to what was otherwise an enjoyable specialization.",1
90084,All the assignments are so unclear and you´ve to lose so much time trying to understand the goal of the problem.,1
90101,"Could have been awesome course if it discussed some detailed approaches. Only 3 panning approaches discussed in 4 weeks, thus disappointing.",1
90137,"If the course had the same information and effort as week1 over all 4 weeks i would gave 5 stars, although the assignments are pretty good and I learnt something new, however the assignments are fun but the grader is annoying as the single error output is..... something is wrong... try again?!",1
90144,This course need a serious rework.For the moment I finished it biggest problem was very unclear grading of programming assignments and lack of learning materials.,1
90146,Lack of support from course teaching staff in answering student's questions.,1
90150,"This is the second of the series, and I had high hopes for this one after the first one was a disappointment.While the material was on the sparse side, the level of the course was more as advertised. The Matlab assignments were not too difficult, but were relevant enough to the material to be acceptable. Some of the assignment simulations/animations were not working, but I was able to submit the results and get full credit. I was ready to give 2 or 3 stars in this review.Unfortunately, on the last assignment, the sample code and scripts was buggy (even towards the end of the course after it had been pointed out to the staff), and inconsistently written.The final project submit script would not work and it was a trial and error troubleshooting to understand why. Some on the discussion boards were able to submit, but other couldn't. Although my assignment would run as I understand the project should, I could not even submit it. Judging from the discussion boards, I'm not the only one with this problem.Again, the University of Pennsylvania has missed the mark with this class and the robotics series. It is regretful that I must again leave a one star review.I realize this is the first time this course was offered, so there are some issues that need to be worked out. I suggest for the remainder of the classes in the series, the creators should do a pilot run first before releasing to Coursera.",1
90155,"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.",1
90160,"Sorry to say that this is not a well prepared course. The course video provided is quite short, the quiz is rather than nothing and the programming assignments are buggy. I don't feel that I learned a lot from this course.UPenn has let me down twice. Hope the 3rd one will be better.",1
90178,The course is so weak. No enough illustration for the content of the course. It's too short and not prepared very well.,1
90183,"The course is very bad and feels thrown together at the last minute. Learning A* and Dijkstra's algorithm is great however the assignments require you to learn not just the little details but to ""discovery"" techniques not even mentioned in the course material. In addition, you must have strong matlab programming skills and be familiar with much matlab functionality in order to debug some of the assignments. You must have more knowledge concerning matlab than any of the course material or pointers provides. Meaning that beginners will NOT pass this course. The automatic grader provides no feedback at all except pass or fail. This is unfortunate as it can look like your code is working correctly but, the grader is using some edge cases to grade the code but will not include any information indicating what to look for. This is really atrocious. Although the TA's do occasionally provide answers to questions. The total amount of time TA's spend answering questions is just really poor. Don't expect even well asked questions to be answered at all. In addition, the coded template quality upon which your own code depends is horrible and thrown together. You will spend way too much time analyzing it for clues as to what went wrong. Sadly, enough all of these issues have caught up with me and I was unable to pass assignment 2 part 2. Even, though everything looks like it works and achieves the desired goal and even works with all of my own test cases. The grader is merciless. Perhaps, in the feature more time can be devoted to make this course better and I can spend more time learning how the algorithms and maths work rather than matlab and the automatic grader. At this time I don't feel like my money was well spent on these courses. I don't think I would like to risk another 50 dollars learning matlab and debugging the automatic grader on any of the other courses in this specialization. That is very disappointing as I really am passionate about learning robotics and looked forward to the other courses as well.",1
90190,"This is part 2 in the robotics specialization. The course content is way too short and basic for the price. There are about 77 minutes of lecture in total, i.e. less than 20 minutes per week. The first week covers BFS, Dijkstra, and A*, something part of most undergrad programs. The rest of the material is ok but very basic. The programming assignments are ""implement Dijkstra"" in week 1, ""implement Dijkstra on a Torus"" (and ""do triangles intersect?"") in week 2, a very simple for loop in week 3, and ""implement gradient descent"" in week 4. I could complete the course by looking at it on-and-off over one weekend.The material that is presented is presented well, but there's not enough of it.For reference, part 1 of the robotics specialization had over twice as much lecture content (by time) and then lots of supplementary material in addition to that, quizzes that required some thinking, and more relevant and at least slightly harder programming assignments.",1
90191,"The assignment code is ambiguous and the assignment is not clear! The lecture is not much helpful than I thought it would be. Overall, I would not recommend this course if you don't need the certificate.",1
90193,"Very poor teaching. Extremely difficult to decipher what is important and will be tested, and what is not. They assume that you know terminology and concepts that are not taught. Half of what they show, you are told to ignore. Obviously smart and capable researchers, but teaching the lay person is not their strong point.",1
90235,Bad quality slides and presentation. not possible to use headphone since it was on mono not stereo. Interesting topic but not well executed to fit online learning,1
90237,topic is interesting however the lecturers not quite lively,1
90238,"the instructor voice are so calm , so i cannot concentrate well",1
90251,Extremely boring and not,1
90253,"Similar to other courses in this specialization, the material is very nice (although slightly easy and straightforward), but the course instructors do not moderate the discussions enough to make them a useful tool. Especially when I'm paying for the specialization, I would appreciate responses to my questions.",1
90255,The course was very shallow as if teaching english literature,1
90261,"The course contents are unfortunately very poorly designed, and this has been an ongoing trend in this overall specialization.The weekly lecture videos are at times quite unclear and leave more questions unanswered than they answer. I (and other learners) have found glaring gaps in the course content again and again. The examples that the lecture videos use do not nearly cover the variety of datasets being used by the learners in the course; and the least that could have been done is to at least inform learners of what to expect if they were dealing with a different research question and using an alternate dataset.I know the defense may be that the videos are meant to be introductory / gateway to a deeper understanding of that particular topic. The course moderators / instructors did a terrible job in keeping up with answering key questions that were posted in the discussion board. Yet most of the times when I was still searching for answers, looking up similar introductory videos in Youtube were far more helpful (and I didn't have to pay to watch them).The assignments are poorly worded because the instructions are not always very clear, which in my opinion set up a lot of learners including myself for failure. The lectures are often broader than what should be considered when finishing the weekly assignment. It wasn't even clear at times of what was exactly being expected in the assignment. The rubric that I had to use to mark my peers' work meant their analysis had gaps because the criteria for assessment is not transparent AT ALL during the submission of an assignment (they are starkly different in terms of details).All to say that I have been quite frustrated despite my best efforts to learn from these materials and much MUCH more can be done to improve the actual content of the lectures.Please consider adding alternate resources AS WELL where learners can go seek the right answers if the answer is not provided by the lecture materials. This can help to cut back on countless precious hours for those who are juggling a full-time job and retraining / career change like I am, not to mention the countless other scenarios of other learners out there.I am neither inattentive nor lazy, and learning this content is very important to me, if it wasn't clear through my comments here already.One last comment, for those of you who are all very sceptical let me tell you that I know that I don't have to be a statistician to grade the course contents, and I really hope the intructors are paying attention to these and similar comments from those enrolled in this specialization and the others who have completed the course.",1
90263,too easy,1
90286,"Sloppy, unorganized, and poorly presented. Try the similar class on EdX and YouTube for a much better and clear explanation and presentation.",1
90312,The assignments and weekly work is by far much more than the hours estimated. Finally I feel as I didn't learn anything.,1
90319,The least comprehensive course I ever took. It needs very good prerequisite about computer vision. And the demostration was very poor.,1
90435,Whilst I can see why the idea of reproducible research is important there was't really enough material in this course for the full four weeks - and in fact a lot of the videos repeated the same information.,1
90510,"1 for Knitr, otherwise it's waste of time.",1
90512,Too expensive for such a simple course,1
90524,Completely irrelevant material.,1
90525,"I've already written a review but it seems to have been removed...This is an awful course, there is very little purpose to it whatsoever, it is basically a module in markdown which will in all honesty not have much application for most learners.In addition, the course is not at all balanced / laid out well, there is a peer assignment in week 1, which you need to have covered week 2's content for.Lastly, the recording quality of some of the lectures is awful, it is clear that they have simply used some recordings of an actual classroom session of a related course instead of recording for Coursera.In all honesty, this entire specialisation is of awful quality, it is not a data science course, it is a ""here's a few useful things in R"" course, and the instructors should be ashamed that their institution makes money from it.",1
90532,I felt this course could have been added as sections to other courses. One separate course for this topic is a waste of money.,1
90563,"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!",1
90580,"In getting feedback from my peer review which I am very open to feedback however, I guess I did not appreciate being told what I should or shouldn't do in my classroom with my kids. I appreciate suggestions for improvement but, I felt that more critique was on my teaching style than my writing. Again I appreciate feedback, but unless in my classroom with my kids and doing something I have done numerous times at the request of my own principal I did not thin it was fair. Also, as a teacher there is never just one way of doing things there is always multiple ways and being told to do it one way, there way was not appropriate at least for me so, this course although very",1
90610,"I wouldn't recommend this course to my worst enemy. There is 0 commitment from the TA and mentor staff. After 4 weeks of course, not a single reply from any of them in the forums.To make matters worse, the material is very superficial and lacking, the biggest proof of that is that each module is composed of about 4 videos of 5 minutes each! How can you learn anything in 5 minutes? The topics are so complex, there is simply no way to convey their message in just about 5 minutes. I had to search a lot outside of this course to grasp something of the topics covered. Actually, I found way better explained videos on youtube for free.The assignments of this course are poorly developed and don't reflect what is discussed in the videos well. I repeat myself, the study material was very lacking and consequently not enough for the assignments themselves. I had to spend days coding, debugging and reverse engineering the assignment files to finally be able to pass because they were wrong! They were incomplete and had wrong information. This is not a reverse engineering course... I shouldn't need to do that. Anyway, I did it because there was also no help from any TA to guide me in the right direction.Long story short, you are way better off checking the syllabus of this course and checking videos on youtube to learn about them, you'll learn way more than with this money grabber course.",1
90616,"Barely any contents in the course. Only a few minutes of lectures, no quizzes and poorly constructed assignments that waste a lot of time. Weeks 2 and 4 have the worst material I've seen in all the courses I've taken until today.",1
90622,You need to have deep knowledge in matlab to get pass the assignments. I have spent more time figuring out how the simulations are implemented that really learning about the target algorithm to implement.,1
90626,"A lot of things to improve, specially thr learning courve is from 1 to 100 and a lot of pre knowledge need, your future public is the hobby robotics people who want to expand their knowledge, a litlle more weeks maybe two can increase the likes for the course. Check this one Control of Mobile Robots you can get an example of a good learning curve",1
90628,The assignment is meaningless. lack of instructions.,1
90666,Just boring lectures.After 30 minutes I was finish with the course.The course is very superficial. The instructor also speaks to fast. Sounds like she just read a text trough.,1
90707,"since there is a lot of math involved, there should be some carefully written readings. (not only slides or phd thesis)",1
90710,"[I am speaking from my personal experience about this course. I don't mean to insult anyone or criticize the method of teaching and I am not doubting the credentials of instructors. It is just what I experienced from this course that I am saying. However, I don't mean to discourage anyone from attempting this course. This review is just a summary of what I felt about the first two weeks of this course.]I don't think this course is for the beginners at all. The teaching method did not quite please me. It appears that the instructors and TAs are simply reading the transcripts and bombarding equations on the screen. Also, the course hasn't made any reading material available, and they are not even providing the slides for the lectures (as of till DEC 2016).I have enrolled and completed a course on mobile robotics from Georgia Tech on Coursera and they were using slides and at the same time the instructors were scribbling equations on the slides and ensuring that they maintain synchronicity with the learning and showing them how a particular equation emerges. They also had lectures which were designed to help learners attempt the quiz and special section about MATLAB and how to build robots. They also provided slides to revise what was mentioned in the lectures. They were teaching and not reading from teleprompter.This course looked lot of theoretical and I am not sure for whom it is designed for. Also, in the discussion forum, I haven't received answer to the questions that I'm posting(since right now it's holiday season, I can exempt them from not replying).I knew I could carry on with this irritation and still get the course certificate for which I've paid for, but then there is no point in wasting time in which the explanation is not clear. It would take me almost 20 to 30 minutes to make notes over a 5 minute long video. I would rather read a book on this subject.I would have appreciated if they followed certain steps:1) Make some course material which will help students read and revise information.2) Suggest some reading/reference material to understand the concepts which are not otherwise covered in this course.3) Use pointers(touch screen devices) to show and point out which equations are being referred to and maintain synchronicity between the information given in the slides and the one said by the instructor.4) Supplementary lectures are extremely fast paced and please don't take derivation of an equation for granted and please do explain.So, if you are looking forward to do this course, I suggest you go forward if you have an in-depth knowledge about vectors, matrices and calculus.",1
90762,"This course is not even considered as an introduction it's a complementary for those whose career is robotics , in other words the required prerequisites are more than matlab programming skills and some calculus and algebra, its assignments have many problems that cannot be solved using just the course studying.the course doesn't give many information.",1
90768,"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.",1
90803,"Advertised as an easy course, week 1 is simple but quickly becomes far too difficult by week 2... Too late for your refund.",1
90812,"Very poor. Assignments consist of transcription of formulae given in lectures, and then manually searching the parameter space for solutions.",1
90861,"I had very high hopes for this course. I was actually planning to purchase the specialization - just as a thank you gesture. Unfortunately, there is very little to be grateful for here.In this course, you get a series of super short lectures giving you an overview of the math and physics behind the aerial robotics. I can't be the judge (since I hold a degree in this area), but I don't think you'll be able to get much if you aren't familiar with the topics yet. And you most certainly won't learn anything new if you had some previous training.And then suddenly there are assignments. That have almost nothing to do with the lectures, but require quite a bit of Matlab programming (did I mention you won't be taught any Matlab in the process?) To make things worse, the assignments are rather poorly explained.By the way, you won't get any replies from the course team - they even ignore questions about errors in lectures.The course looks very sloppy. As if someone forced the team to put together something for Coursera. A huge disappointment :(",1
90865,"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",1
90871,"This course was not a beginning level course as advertised.Test cases for assignments were neither document nor otherwise explained within the course materials. Quizzes during the lecture were often unrelated to the material just presented or were given before the relevant material was taught.The course creators obviously put a lot of time and effort into this course. So it is difficult for me to write such a critical review. However, they missed the mark with this one enough that I can't recommend the course.Unfortunately I will not be completing this course only due to the fact that I have run out of time and patience to complete the last assignment.",1
90876,"So close but yet so far ...Course concepts are interesting and the programming assignments are fun but the presentation can be greatly improved.Criticisms include:(i) The course isn't self contained. Physical concepts like 'resultant moment', 'inertial and body-fixed frame' and 'torque' are used without definition. Mechanics is not listed as a prerequisite but it should be.(ii) Lectures are very mathematical but proofs, intuition and good problem sets are all missing. Listening to a math lecture without doing challenging problems or deriving mathematical results to build intuition can be a waste of time. Check out John Cochrane's Asset Pricing 1 and 2 or Tim Roughgarden's Algo 1 and 2 for great examples of thoughtful problem sets and intuitive derivations.(iii) Way too much powerpoint! Speed reading a static powerpoint slide overloaded with dense mathematical formulas without using pointers or animations to focus the students attention is a recipe for confusion and frustration. I find hand written derivations, even when the handwriting is a little sloppy, much easier to follow than a static page of formulas plus a sound track. Hand written derivations impose a natural pace and focal point to the content. Check out Gilbert Strang's Linear Algebra, Sebastian Thrun's Artificial Intelligence for Robotics and Andrew Ng's Machine Learning for examples of good derivations of mathematically sophisticated material.(iv) The programming assignments while fun were somewhat ad hoc and disconnected from the lecture material, specifically, the main task of every single assignment was to hand tune a pd controller. No systematic approach was ever described for performing this task.",1
90878,This is a totally theoretical course. This actually does not help to build a quadcopter from the scratch. It should have been mentioned in the introduction. I am opting out. The lectures did not seem appropriate for the people without proper background. Not satisfied.,1
90936,"Really bad course. They don't explain the concepts clearly, the quizzes ambiguously ask things not seen in the videos and the instructor introduces equations without further explanation. The course Autonomous Navigation for Flying Robots (edX) is much better.",1
90951,"Requires MATLAB. In my view, a university should not be promoting a proprietary product. There have been other Cousera courses which used Octave, the free-software implementation of the programming language implemented by MATLAB.I have seen no good reason why Octave should not have been used for this course.",1
90954,The videos doesn't tell anything related to the test. How can I know the answers? Am I going to search them on the internet? Then what the meaning to learn this course?,1
90965,"Some of this content is glaringly wrong e.g that F Roosevelt's freedoms weren't seen by him as inalienable rights, that culture and education were attributes of Eleanor's approach to freedom that were distinctive from FDR. One can go on and on ....",1
90975,I enrolled weeks ago and I found that the system has kicked me out the course. I accomplished some themes and now what? Do I need to start again? Also I have already paid for the certificate.. com,1
90976,Two days later and still no available.,1
90991,Poor alignment between assignments and lectures. Lots of content poorly explained.,1
91006,"I would give this course 0 stars if possible.I am amazed that anyone rated this course better than 1 or 2 stars!The lectures are not focused on the information that is necessary for the obnoxiously long and tedious assignments.The assignments are poorly written and demand too much Ruby expertise for a course meant for Ruby novices. I spent over 15 hrs trying to complete week 2's assignment and still could not finish. I became so frustrated and actually angry at how difficult this course is designed I decided to quit. Coursera should not allow there to be courses that evoke such frustration and emotion. John Hopkins should be embarrassed that their name is associated with the pedagogical malpractice that is this specialization series.Foolishly, I paid for the entire specialization up front and Coursera refuses to refund me for the remaining two courses. (which I have not even taken)",1
91022,Unacceptable assignments length! The reason somebody would enroll to distance programme is due to personal high workload. It took me 2 weeks (not 6 hours as tutor mentions) to complete half of the second assignment and I am about to tell that I learnt nothing about MongoDB. The videos cover the very basics and in order somebody to complete the assignments needs searching in the internet. The videos must change to include more details about the presented topic.I am about to drop out of the specialization only because the specific course.,1
91055,"Very poor course, especially when it gets to the last weeks, there are no enough instructions to help you in the exam. it is all about money transaction, I am sorry to say that.",1
91073,Too much talking in a lot of these course offerings. I have ADD and I cannot take excessive talking.,1
91293,"It's a mix of too much basic and irrelevant tips from different realms: pronounced english (which, in my opinion could be a great course of it's own), public speeking (only the basic of how to deliver which can be sum up to one page) and how to interact with other people (like how to say you are agree or disagree??? I strongly believe that if a person can understand those videos, I'm pretty sure that he knows that 5-years-old-extremly-basic-stuff).As much I like this concept of coursera, ""speak english professionally"" or even ""speak english"" is really a big statement for that course. Actually, from what it seems, the main point of that course is to get the students to purchase the full package of courses that the Georgia Tech Language Institude is offering. If you really like to know a great course that relates to the topic, I strongly advise you to check out the course ""Public Speaking"" by Dr. Matt McGarrity here at coursera. Best of luck.",1
91297,"I was expecting something else, very basic information.",1
91322,"In my opinion this course does not teach you to 'speak English professionally', but it teaches you to 'learn how to speak English'. I was looking for a course that would teach me how to write professional emails and have professional phone conversations, like which words I should use, what common sentences are or how to build up professional sentences. I am a bit disappointed and think this course was a waste of time for me. This is really meant for people that are learning to speak English and don't know how to pronounce words or how to respond to people in a really easy way.",1
91348,Way too elementary.,1
91430,"Unforyunately all the information is rather basic, most of the knowledge provided is intuitively understandable. Didn't learn anything new. Probably the problem is that it really is super basic and may be useful for somebody who is doing 1-2 year of Bachelor's.",1
91444,Instructor is not clear and too fast!,1
91479,"I did all four courses - the whole specialization. Each course in itself was aright and I learned new things. However, the course certificate is meaningless. It neither states the content nor the effort (for example the hours). Instead, it even says ""non-credit course"". This is despite the fact that the course equates ""35 PDU's"" and ""counts towards the UCI Project Management Certificate Programm""; as it was described in the FAQ. I feel betrayed. How can I apply with such a meaningless peace of paper anywhere?",1
91681,"Charging for free content, really?? Go fuck yourselves",1
91734,"Given that Python 2 was replaced by Python 3 some 6 years ago, I'm dismayed to see that this class is teaching Python 2 instead of Python 3.",1
91758,Good overview. Needs to include more hands on development. 1 star because Coursera wont let me take the capstone even after completing all four pre-requisite classes (this one is the fourth).,1
92102,"Verbose, wandering. Instructor takes too long to do too little. No value add over a textbook.",1
92108,"No teaching. Just a guy talking. Do the problem sets for practice. If you need help, pause the videos and try the code out yourself.Seriously though, a programming course where the teacher is not actively type out the code but just scribbling around it. He doesn't work through code but talks around the concepts.",1
92446,The Final Exam was way too difficult compared with the knowledge provided by the lessons.,1
92452,Very poorly organised material and illustration,1
92455,Poor lectures by one of the instructors makes it hard to listen.,1
92465,"In just the first 2 weeks I found several quiz questions that are not correct. Example code in quizzes is not complete. Spacing and indentation are incorrect in quiz samples(I realize this is probably to prevent copy paste testing of code, but you cannot answer is this code correct if you don't know where they wanted indentation to line up). Lecture presentation is not very engaging, almost seems like the female instructor was forced to stand in front of a camera and read note cards. Withdrew early.",1
92466,"Errors and glitches in the first two quizes that aren't fixed ('Don't worry, be happy, it's just a formating error, ignore the literal text displayed and just use your imagination to interpret what we thought we meant to say') have left me too unimpressed to spend more time wondering if I need to debug my code or debug their quizes.There are many other resources for learning python out there, and some of them take pedagogy seriously. Not, it seems, this one.",1
92580,"This is a really weak, and not very smart course compared to the other two in this specialisation (strategy formulation & strategy implementation)",1
92732,"The actual material in the course is fascinating and quite useful but, as is common with so many Coursera courses, the enjoyment of completing the course is severely hampered by the requirement to review the final assignment of other students. The purposes of these courses is to learn from experts in the field not to grade the work of others. I wish Coursera would really stop professors from pushing their responsibility- grading the work of the students and offering THEIR feedback- onto the students who may or may not have a firm grasp of the material in question.",1
92736,"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.",1
92747,"Although the information on the course states that it requires no prior programming knowledge, that statement isn't accurate. You will quickly become lost in the assignments and questions as they are a not a logical progression from the lecture material. The instruction from Mr Peng is all over the place and doesn't give you a good understanding of the language. I found SWIRL to be 100% more helpful. But looking at the upcoming materials, you need to have a solid background in programming to complete this specialization. Which SHOULD have been told to students prior to them spending money on the course. I would NOT recommend this course to anyone.",1
92761,"Possibly the least well structured class ever. Also, not made for people to actually learn how to program in R. It is sad that I paid for this, and ended up going to another resource to learn... and it was much much easier.",1
92769,the assignments were very hard to understand. the course videos were poor.,1
92804,There is a huge disconnect between the lectures and what is asked in the homework assignments.,1
92820,Not the best course for beginners. Too much theory and no implementation. Also the assignments were impossible for a beginner.,1
92871,Damn near worthless. The course material has significant gaps of information. The programming assignments require knowledge that isn't presented in the course. I had to Google my way through this entire course. I would not recommend it.,1
92896,Very hard for a beginner. Lacks the slow build up I needed. Missing an explanation about a comma cost me about 4 hours. The assignments are brutal which encourages cheating.,1
92903,"Honestly, I'm very disappointed with this course. The content taught in this course is not in accordance with the assignments. It is like someone taught to be a builder and asked to build the Brooklyn Bridge ... Not fair at all.If you are going to ask to build a bridge, teach me how. If you teach me how to be a builder ask me for a wall, not a bridge.",1
92913,huge gap from lectures and swirl to the assignments.,1
92985,Instructor doesn't seem to be passionate about giving the lecture,1
93010,"I had really high hopes for this course. I am not a programmer, though in college I learned C, C++, and used MATLAB a fair amount. I wanted to learn R because it is a free software versus paying a licencing fee to use SPSS which I have done in the past. I had already completed the first week of the course and the first week in this course. I went through the slides and I didn't really feel like I learned any actual programming so then to expect to answer questions where you had to program seemed a bit out of left field. As a comparison it felt like they had an hour worth of slides talking about different trees and how to differentiate them then asked you to drive a tank.I then took the time go through two swirl assignments which I hoped was going to fill in the many gaps left by the slides. They were definitely more helpful than the slide show, but I still felt like they would teach you how to add then ask you to multiply.So in general my recommendation would be not to take the course unless you have a fairly solid understand of programming, otherwise you will do what I did and just wasted $50.",1
93086,Assignments do not match up well with the lessons and the lessons are BAD. They are not educational.,1
93110,Not enough support!I,1
93141,"Very painful training, the contents reviewed in the material will not make you capable to solve the weekly assignments, you will have to learn what you need on your own. To me the only value added of this course is that I will receive a proof that I know how to define basic functions in R.",1
93188,There is a disconnect between the video lectures and the assignments/quizzes.,1
93225,The assignments had nothing to do with the lectures. The teachers do a poor job of explaining basic concepts and theories. The class is a lot more advanced than the class description makes it seem.,1
93246,"A University Course should be a place where you advance your knowledge with a ""limited and reasonable"" amount of time spent in the course. The role of instructors should be to ""invest"" the time to provide the concepts and information for the students of the course to ""learn"" faster than if they had to research (the planet) by themselves to find the knowledge. The information provided by instructors therefore must be ""accurate and complete"". This course has so many ""incomplete"" pieces of information, that it requires insurmountable amounts of time to ""find"" the concepts required to apply the knowledge, hence it becomes a gigantic ""time waster"". Unfortunate! the tool and the concept of data science is necessary, but a course organized this way is only for ""full time students"" that have only one obligation, study. This course as it is should not be in Coursera.",1
93252,Somewhere during the second week there is a gap in coding that I could not overcome and this ruined the whole interest in pursuing the course because in order to overcome it I had to cheat. I don't feel like I am learning anymore.,1
93266,homework was poorly structured and not adequately discussed in the lecture videos. Had to dig through several buried links to make any progress on the homework assignments.,1
93267,The videos have very little to do with tests,1
93297,"This course was frustrating, the learning curve nearly vertical, the material dense and inaccessible, and the evaluative assignments impossible for new users of R without outside resources. No one should take this course unless they are powering through it for the Data Science specialization. Otherwise, would-be students should just buy an R For Dummies book, and use materials elsewhere.",1
93300,They shouldn't compact 14+ videos in one week.,1
93386,"Course does not do a good job actually explaining R or training you on how to properly use it. The lectures go over the material very fast and you do not get much out of them, and then the assignments throw complex problems that are very difficult. You spend most of your time Googling to learn it, and I find that I would have learned R better if I just did that to start without this course. Maybe if you aren't new to R and have a programming background, it may not be so bad, but if you are new to R and not an experienced programmer, this is not the class to take to learn it.",1
93413,Professor needs to emphasize on basics before going advance.,1
93428,"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).",1
93436,"I'm giving this course one star because zero stars is not an option.I wish I had read course reviews prior to beginning. First assignment was tough... but do-able. Second assignment seems straight forward, but the template they ask that you follow contains small tricks which appear to be FAR BEYOND anything touched on in lectures.I'm actually going to fight for my money back, what a scam.",1
93437,"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.",1
93447,"Death by power point. If you can learn from essentially listening to a pod cast and reading unix type manual pages, then this course is for you! If you're like the rest of the population, then these lecture videos are useless. The only redeeming quality to this course has been the homework, but you can find them online or come up with them on your own.",1
93451,Lectures are very boring and designed in a weird way. He is simply reading the book that he wrote and no real practice was ever done.,1
93457,"The jump from the lecture material to the assignments was way too much. In order to complete the assignments, one needs to spend lots of time learning things not covered in the course.",1
93463,"This is way too esoteric. The content was delivered way too fast for me to keep up and process it. This needs to be taught with more frequent hands on examples. I'm also not sure why, if auditing, we can't submit and see how we're doing on the learning. I have no way to evaluate if I'm picking up the concepts or not, which is a struggle. Overall, I would not recommend this course for R beginners. I would look elsewhere.",1
93466,Why should I waste my time listening to someone reading a book to me...,1
93472,This course was so convoluted and not practical that it made me lose complete interest in the specialization.,1
93474,"For an introductory course with no prerequisites, the assignments should cover material that has been introduced in lectures. Non-introductory and advanced courses in R can require students to look outside of lectures for completing relatively complex problems.",1
93485,This course is the worst course that I have taken so far. I am not happy with the course content and the way that the lecturer uses to teach this course. I really want to refund my money!,1
93515,"Not a class for the beginning programmer. The lectures do not line up with the assignments, and if you don't have programming experience, you could easily spend 10-20 hours/week figuring out how to finish the assignments.",1
93516,not the model of learning that is encouraging or sticks. hard for a student (even one who has a programming background) to sit through hours of slides explaining what the functions and definitions in the language do without a layer of use context upfront.The content jumps from specific examples to unrelated specific definitions without carrying a sense of integrating the new knowledge with any past knowledge in the course. the whole course seems disjointed.would have been much more effective as learning through examples and to be taught functions and definitions as they come up in problem solving.,1
93523,"The lectures and Swirl exercises are extremely easy to understand and follow, but then the assignments are incredibly complicated and difficult. The assignments ask for techniques that aren't focused on or even covered in the lectures. The tips offered by Al Warren in the Discussion forum make the assignments possible to do. Since the tips are so critical to understanding and completing the assignments, I think Al Warren's tips should be incorporated as part of the core course. This course needs more time to be covered in depth - it's a lot of ground to cover in just one month,",1
93531,Actually I feel like i'm reading the instruction manual without knowing useful skills,1
93533,"I managed to complete this course, but that was because of my four years of ""MOOC-level"" ""programming experience"" and duckduckgo (~google), not because of the course material. Videos are dull readings of the pdfs, with many ""ummmm""s and annoying lip-clicks. Examples are useless, explanations are often vague or even incomplete. The assignments are relatively hard in that you don't get all the necessary info from the course, sometimes even R's own manpages aren't enough. (Which is a shame, as you'd expect a course to teach you how to use the tools you will need for the assignments.)If you have no programming experience, stay away from this course!Otherwise, if you want to learn R, look for other resources, and save yourself some time and money.",1
93540,"The course is misleading - the difficulty ramps up too quickly, with the result that those who do not have a programming background will not be able to keep up. It should be toned down and reworked, or split into two courses. Cramming everything into 4 weeks makes everything too difficult.",1
93547,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.,1
93563,In Lectures rate of speech is really fast and in some presentations are not clear,1
93573,"Poorly organized and managed. Each week of this course should have been broken down into individual 4 week courses. I have 20 years software development experience, and I can tell you this is too much information to cram into a single class.",1
93591,"I am really unhappy with this course. Coming to R with some background in statistics and SQL, but lacking programming experience, I assumed this would be an introduction. The material in the lectures is straightforward enough, and the swirl exercises are easy to get through and informative, but the assignments are, without exception, based on writing functions in R with basically zero experience. Having no background or frame of reference for best practices in syntax, logic, etc, and very little information in the lectures or supplementary material to help, I found these to be almost impossible to complete.Furthermore, there's no mechanism or provision in the course to review the assignments after they're submitted. So not only did I not feel like I was doing the work correctly, I can't get feedback, and the lecturer doesn't break down the rationale behind the assignment, and how he would have done it or why. In addition, the assignments bear only a tangential relationship to the lecture material. So I would be feeling good coming out of a lecture and going through swirl exercises, only to be plunged into a programming assignment that was far too advanced for the small steps I felt I had taken in my overall competence with the language and material.I don't doubt that someone with better knowledge of programming can get through this stuff, but this class should be reserved for advanced learners only, or maybe be broken up into two courses. I feel like I wasted $49.",1
93604,"Completely lost. This is not meant for rank beginners. Data Camp's free R course has been much more helpful for me than this. It doesn't have the same level of detail as this, but at least I'm not watching an instructor gloss over concepts or ideas that are completely foreign to me as someone completely new to programming.",1
93605,"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.",1
93608,"This is probably the most pedagogically inept course I have ever enrolled on. Although the content is what you would hope to find in such a course, the delivery of it is outrageously bad. When to complete your assignment, Google becomes your best friend rather than your lecture notes, you know that something is wrong. The idea that a baby thrown in the water may just learn to swim rather than drown is pedagogically retarded. Unfortunately, this seems to be the approach here...",1
93614,Not for new programmers. The lecture material is also not logically organized and does not correspond to the assignments.,1
93634,Week 2 is an unreasonably difficult jump from Week 1. This course's beginner friendly lectures do not align with the level of understanding needed to complete the assignments.,1
93657,Assignments not always in line with lecture.Material is above beginner level.,1
93659,"there is a huge distance between what you teach in the videos, which is fine, and the programming assingments which seem to be apt at an expert audience.to solve these problems I have to spend hours and hours on the internet looking at other people doing similar projects or asking for help.I agree that by looking you can get insight into what you are doing, but the lessons need to be built little by little and supported by practice.You can't slam me with these cache problems giving me an example that is hard to understand (much harder than anything seen during class) and expect me to do it in 5 hours per week. Maybe 5 hours per day.Disappointed. I wanted to use the whole course to learn about rprogramming but I will most likely try to get back the money I spent on this and let it go.",1
93669,"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!",1
93680,"It's good introduction, but the assignment are rather poor. Not worth paying for it",1
93742,Waste money and time! Do not explain very well!,1
93758,"BEWARE. If you are someone who is new to more advanced math or to any sort of coding, this course will be very confusing, totally unpractical, and you'll walk away not feeling like you've really learned how to use R in a real way.I was incredibly disappointed.",1
93764,You can't do assignments using the lecture materials. Need A LOT of time to finish this course.,1
93767,"Very poorly constructed. There are major jumps in the difficulty of material that are completely unnecessary. The material could very easily be broken down into more manageable and comprehensible chunks. There is no repetition of any exercise or function to engrain any of the material. This course suffers grossly from the ""curse of knowledge"". If it were structured in a way where (a) material was broken down into smaller bits, ideally as beta tested by true rank novices and (b) all materials or specific functions were presented with repetition, similar to how khan academy structures its math section, then this course would be much better. I would also assume, given a and b, that there would be higher retention and comprehension. The expected time requirements are also wildly amiss. Try beta testing this on TRUE rank novices. The program suggests that this is for ""beginners"". I find it doubtful that a true beginner would fare well in this course.",1
93802,"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.",1
93804,"The teacher goes very fast with the concepts without really spending much time on each of them. It will be great if instead of covering all things in short amount of time, the teacher could write R code using each type of function in console so that students know exactly what to expect.",1
93829,I found the jump in difficulty for the first assignment too great. This seems to be a view reflected elsewhere.,1
93838,"Don't take this course unless you have a programming background. Week 2 has a programming assignment that is way to advanced for students without any programming knowledge. This assignment deals with functions, where the code is complicated. What's unfortunate is that you have to finish ever assignment, including this impossible assignment (for beginners) to get recognition for the course. I spent most of my time researching other sources for information because the lectures, and the supplemental information given on a different site, by the instructor (which indicate knowledge that the lectures are insufficient) give trivial examples when the programming assignments are anything but. This course needs some serious adjustments, either with the prerequisites needed for success in this course, or with the material within the assignments themselves.",1
93859,There is a wide gap between the lectures and the practice. Its clear that the video material is completely inadequate and insufficient for the course. A poor introduction to programming.,1
93863,The gap between the lecture materials and programming assignment is enormous. So much of lecture seem to be on the history and theoretical of R programming that it completely fails to cover the material needed to actually completed the programming assignments. Incredibly disappointing!,1
93869,"They don't give enough inputs and instructions to complete the assignments, unless they could offer addicional material.",1
93889,Very superficial and inconclusive.The course professor focuses more on himself than on the material.,1
93933,Poor. Very boring and dull presentation. Hardly anything is explained very clearly. It would be far more profitable to simply study an appropriate textbook or online course notes.,1
94006,I can't pass because you don't allow me submit my assignment and asked me to subscribe although this course is paid !!!,1
94022,WoW awful presentation but great instructor. I expected much more than this but :(Leveraging employer brand is not compelete :\,1
94051,Horrible experience as a student. No moderator or the faculty replies to your queries. The instructor has just left the course to take its own accord. It is frustrating to get such a response when you have paid a hefty much for the course.,1
94101,"There should be an instructor available to address specific grading concerns. Peer-grading is too subjective and students use their opinions as opposed to rubrics for grading, and often do not read all the material prior to assigning a score.",1
94111,"No option of completing the course without paying. So why do you call your site FREE online courses? And why do we have to go into the trouble of attending the class and watching the videos, and reading the material without being capable of at least watching our results in assignments?I am a member of your site for many years and I have also recommended your site in many people.",1
94164,Unable to start the course. The page re-loads again and again in an endless loop!,1
94196,"This course was a big let-down compared to other courses in the specialization. It doesn't seem like a lot of effort went into course planning and creation. Much of the content is unclear and there is little depth. course textbook, and some swirl exercises would have helped.",1
94252,"Gosh I hated hated hated this course. Nothing to learn here. You will just be given lots of names with no explanation whatsoever.I often felt really angry at the teacher because of the way he would introduce entire prediction models without explaining anything about them. Also, I really didn't like the fact that the course is centered on caret, a ""shortcut"" package to do stuff fast. Before doing things fast I need to know what I am doing! Finally, the quizzes and assignments are completely disconnected from the courses.The worst course I have ever taken on coursera.",1
94282,"too general no depth, not recommended for science or engineering degree holders",1
94285,To be honest I don't think this is worth the money.,1
94313,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.,1
94324,"Material is very high level. No ppt's are given, so all links presented in the video's cannot be viewed.Quizzes are based upon old packages, so incorrect answers are provided.No replies at discussion board from TA""s or instructors.",1
94338,"Cannot take the exam, I have to pay... wtf... I will probably pay at the end, but I want to take the class first. Without certificate I cannot prove I took the course.",1
94360,"Project description versus requirements were terrible, not sure if the new Coursera format played a role in the issues or not. Quite a few of the homework items require guessing as the answers don't align to the results of the latest tools they have you use. If the first class or three in the series was like this I wouldn't have taken the courses.",1
94366,"Poor compared with some of the others on this specialisation. The lectures are too fast and high level, with no allowance given for people who are unfamiliar with this area and attempting to learn it.",1
94371,"Too much surface, not enough depth.",1
94407,"Important material, poorly taught.",1
94438,Not worth it for the bucks.Instructor has tried his best to make no sense of the subject.I would be happy for a refund.,1
94462,"I was really disappointed with this course. I took the other courses from Brian Caffo and truly enjoyed them. For the previous courses, I've always used the books and they helped me tremendously to be able to comprehend the material. There is a book for Regression Models but but it's a real mess. It feels like a draft that no one cared to take a second look. There is a bunch of wrong code and typos. The explanation doesn't go as far as it should. I had to resort to many different sources just to be able to get by the course. I hope the instructors review this course soon because it does not have the same quality as others. If they don't review it, don't bother paying for it. Try learning Regression Models elsewhere.",1
94466,The course is essentially just a review of formulas with very little intuition explained to the beginner. It was necessary to use a collection of outside material from other courses and readings to learn the concepts. This course needs to be completely redone with a focus on developing a student's intuition for the material and then support this intuition with basic examples that build as the course progresses. A fundamental demonstration of how to use R to work through regression models (starting from square one) should be added so that this becomes a self-contained course. As it currently stands it is a collection of poorly integrated slides and concepts that serve to confuse the student more than educate. Other classes teach this material infinitely better.,1
94481,To be honest I don't think this is worth the money.,1
94488,"Content and quizz are not aligned.Mentors answer to 0% of the forum posts.Poor student community.Do not pay for this course, just follow the swirl and/or get some tuto about regressions.",1
94500,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.,1
94522,"Poorly designed, executed and instructed. Too much is left off the materials.",1
94549,This course is not organised so well concerning grading process.....there is a lot of mistakes in the criteria of grading ....also the material is not so good ....I learn nothing new ...... the worst course i took in coursera Actually so no stars goes to this course,1
94551,Teaching behaviourism in 2017 is scandalous.,1
94577,"Although I have passion with film, the quizzes seems to have lots of technical problems. I dropped out right on the first module",1
94581,"This is a lousy course.The subject and material could be interesting; however, the lectures are inanimate and the quizzes are a Rubic's cubes of sudden death with no value to assess whether you've understood the key points of the lectures!While this course was a timed release (implying someone at the U of Copenhagen is involved with it week to week, it feels as if it is an archived course with no live administration; the only interaction you seem to have is with other students.This has got to be the worst Coursera course I have taken and I have taken quite a few.",1
94585,Short overview of history without much of a value.,1
94587,"If you want to memorize what year countries started their public broadcast systems, this is the course for you.It only briefly discusses critical paradigm shifts and shows. The course lacks a critical analysis element and the video lectures are unstructured. It would be almost impossible to pick three key points they want you to learn from each video.",1
94643,"The lectures are a very brief overview of topics, with nothing actually taught. The quizzes are entirely disconnected from the lectures and require basically just finding and reading the right wikipedia pages. This course is an absolute joke and an embarrassment to UPenn, Coursera, and everyone involved. It's clear that the instructors don't care about student's actually learning anything. Compare this to the ""Underactuated Robotics"" course on EdX.",1
94650,This course is the worst one in this specialization. The notations are ambiguous and the quizzes are poorly designed.,1
94657,"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.",1
94658,"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.",1
94667,Poorly designed course which tests people on things that are not taught.,1
94668,"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.",1
94682,"It is not well done as the previous courses. The quizzes usually do not concern the topic of the lessons or better, the lessons do not help in anyway to solve the problems.",1
94683,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.,1
94684,"Unfortunately, this specific course lacks in-depth information and problems and exercises in order to get an individual to explore the wide subject, that is, statistics.",1
94685,I suggest to include more and clearer examples to solve problems.,1
94777,"Course lacks wider and real socio-political context of the XIX and XX century Central and Eastern Europe. Additionally, it is full of statements that are not supported by the historical facts.",1
94805,Lecture presentation is very very robotic. It's hard to follow the lecture without proper diagrams or examples.,1
94814,The lecture just reads books.,1
94854,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!,1
94927,"very bad, useless course. Just listing the names of the methods and practices.",1
94947,"The teaching process is very elusive and subtle. The explanations in this course are very unclear and tricky, even some of them are omitted, which makes this course very hard to understand.This course seriously lacks of logic. It's more like a heap of formulas thrown together and what the teacher do in this course is just to read them.",1
94960,This course was uninspiring,1
94989,"The ""Soul Beliefs"" course seems to try presenting things in an unbiased manner yet they cannot hide their bias. If the intention was to hold up various beliefs in the past then try to shoot them down, they partially succeeded. Most rational believers however could still hold onto their beliefs because the arguments were very weak.A better title for the course would be ""why there is no soul"". That way going in a student would realize that there actually was a hidden agenda.",1
95012,"just begun, but so far so good. I will update the stars as the weeks progress!!",1
95032,Unorganized and not very useful. The main goal of the course is for you to use Stack Overflow.....SAVE YOURSELF $,1
95038,"Very poor course, badly taught and terrible value for money. The lessons are brief beyond any form of reasonableness, the teacher seems completely unconnected with his students. There is no detail at all and no logical progression. I took and passed this course with a view to doing the specialisation but I'm not going to waste any more money on University of Michigan courses. I've found similar courses on other platforms which cover the same material. The assignments were awful, in some cases they covered material to be presented the following week, in others the questions were wrongly stated and did not match the output from the machine grading. The machine grading itself gave you no clue as to where you went wrong. I'm not talking about the odd question here or there, I'm talking about consistently throughout every assignment. I don't normally, in fact ever, leave bad reviews, I usually just chalk it up to experience and move on but in this case, the course was so bad, I had to say something. I've done two other courses on Coursera with Rice University and the difference to this course is huge, while I would wholeheartedly recommend the Rice Intro to Python courses, Don't do this course, it is not coherently presented or graded. The mentors in the forum tried their best but even they had to admit the grading system was riddled with errors. Absolute rubbish, avoid and spend your money elsewhere.",1
95053,"The course is a great course in terms of the knowledge and experience of the instructor and the helpfulness of the staff. I gave it 2 stars for two reasons.1) The videos are deceptively short. In MOOC instructional design, you normally design short videos because the attention span of an online learner is tends to be much shorter than an in-person university student. However, in this course, even though the video is short, it is really 5-10 times longer because they speed over the equations and teaching so fast that you have to pause and replay and rewind and replay several times while trying it yourself. So the timings are not truly accurate. If you were actually teaching it in a classroom with actual students you would go much more slowly. In this case, I wish they were more honest with the times by actually typing the code in real time while teaching. I would have preferred a lecture to make it more digestible.2) The hardest thing for me about the course was the fact that instead of practicing computational thinking within data science (decomposition, algorithmic thinking, etc.), I was really just searching on stack overflow for how to put it into python. It's poor instructional design to only teach somethings and expect students to complete assignments without giving them all the tools they will use in the assignment. It would be ok if it were an accidental mistake, but this seems to be purposeful. This happened not just in course assignments but sometimes even in mid-roll video-overlaid quizzes where the answer was something not explained or taught or shown. This was really strange to me and caused a huge amount of time to be spent searching online or trying mid-lecture problems to no avail. It cause all the timings of the course to be off (#1 caused the video timings to be severely off and #2 meant that the course assignment estimates were HUGELY miscalculated). Good instructional design would mean that the professor should show all the tools one could use to faithfully complete and achieve the assignment. For some reason that was avoided again and again in this course.Great material though. I loved learning. I just wish it were better structured and supported and that I learned more about the work rather than just searching online for how to write something.",1
95063,"Unclear assignments, lectures are brief and sometimes unclear. Spent more time trying to understand what was being asked than actually learning.",1
95069,This course is a joke. Contents is very very poor. And you will have a lot of problems making the Assigments.,1
95090,"Instructor gives minimal examples and says ""go look on stack overflow"". Then he proceeds to assign problems that don't really cover what the slides, lectures, or examples were on. If I all I was trying to do was just read some docs and look on stack overflow I wouldn't need to take this course now would I?Poorly translated and cryptic instructions for assembling furniture are better than what you get here.",1
95184,"Assignment 3 was absolutely ridiculous in the sense that the implementation of pandas functions depended on data cleaning in the first step for which there was no help . No response from peers or moderators on my queries. Had high hopes when I joined the course. I feel cheated now. Because of some issues with the data cleaning step, all my following answers were incorrect and I couldn't pass the course in time.",1
95204,"please provide the complete 5 unit details . I could see only this unit is open for past many months. I paid for all 5 unit money already and not in a position revert back and get the money. Could you please help me out to understand when this courses will be available if not in near future , why are they taken money before the course is not ready to us. Quite disappointing experience.",1
95243,Looks like it's prealpha version of what it might be.,1
95257,"While this was one of the better courses I've done on Coursera, the start date of the course was changed without any indication of when it would begin. We've also been waiting months for the next course in the specialisation to begin, again without any communication. This was a good course, but I would recommend people wait until all the rest of the courses are available before starting this course and beginning the specialisation.",1
95284,very tough to catch up.,1
95316,I am an engineer and I use matlab and stata for data analysis and currently taking Machine Learning course by Stanford which is fabulous. I did not like this course for the following reasons:1- bad course design structure2- so confusing and inappropriate sequence3- super fast without providing any intuition4- no fundamental explanation5- course could be longer and spend enough time in each subject,1
95348,"instructor is too fast, video lectures are not enough and assignment questions are not clear which wastes much time just to understand the question",1
95381,unclear and poorly thought out,1
95400,Terrible course. Assignments are extremely buggy and often touches on things not even explained in the lectures. Mentors are not active. Explanations are sketchy and not well paced. Do this course only for the examples in the Jupyter notebook.,1
95405,"Lessons were ok but the assignments were really frustrating, not because of the questions itself but because the questions were organised badly or were really vague and confusing.",1
95410,"I was quite disappointed by the almost total inaccessibility of the staff in the discussion forums, the unconquerability of the autograder for most of the assignments (losing points for no discernible reason, with all resources exhausted), the lack of a stats module for the specialization, and the lack of education, really. There is value in asking students to learn on their own, but this course goes much too far with that, giving problem sets that are virtually unsolvable without prior experience in data wrangling in R or some other data language. This leaves serious, hardworking students with little choice but to troll the forums for solutions. Hardly the best way to learn the intricacies of this subject.",1
95434,"Well, first thing I am going to say this is not going to be looking good, however correct me if I got anything wrong or being unfair.To be honest, I am very frustrated with this course! It is a very good topic that I am very interested and that's the reason I am enrolled , but the support and the structure of it is very disappointing!Example like this(https://www.coursera.org/learn/python-data-analysis/discussions/weeks/3/threads/0kwIpLJDEeawPhIF4bjuNg), question is not even specified and waste me so much time looking for the requirement and post discussion board and wait hopefully somebody is going to reply!Same for the ScimEn file , which again the file name was not specified in the question!From last secession, assignment two have lots of confusing around what exactly the question is asking about and again lots of time being wasted just to figure out the question!The support is poor as well, not like other course , I would usually get a answer within the same day , but this one is really when you are lucky! Plus the staff rarely response!In short, I hope the staff of the course would see this. This is a good topic but the course are poorly designed with very limited support!I mean if you are truly love the topic , you should pass on the passion to your students and design the course that students not only learn the material in the course but also can know how to ask questions and find out the questions themselves ,but first like learning any skills students needs to ask lots of questions ! I am not going to mention that ,coz even the question in the course is full of error !!Unless, the whole purpose is to make some money , then it make sense , however if it is that case , I am not going to enrol in this course any more.",1
95455,starting to like this,1
95467,"The lectures are insufficient, the homework instructions are incorrect, the autograder is terrible.",1
95469,"This is in fact the worst course so far. Mainly because of auto grader. Here are my reasons.Actually I did not complete the course at all. But I suddenly got a message saying that I have completed the course. I was working on the first problem of the 4th assignment. I did a provisional submission to see if my answer was right. Auto grader reported the grade for the 3rd assignment and said that I have passed the course. Any submission I did after that was not graded at all.The assignments are not very clear. Looks like I had a older version of the questions while others had a different version. I was stuck in a particular problem because auto grader did not give me a clear feedback as to why I was incorrect. I wasted too much time on this already.The assignments require too much research outside what is covered in the videos. I don't feel that is right. The assignment requires that we research on Stack Overflow and Pandas documentation. I strongly feel that such activities should be performed only outside the course work when we try to solve real world problems. Course assignments should be reasonably given based only the materials covered in video. This was taking too much time.TThe discussion forums are not giving clear hints. When we are stuck in a problem, we are not able to proceed further. I still son't know the answers for certain problems because the coordinators do not explain the answers well. When we complete assignments we don't get to see the instructor's solution.The video instructions were too fast paced. The instructors do not pause and explain critical aspects of the code.Overall I am very disappointed with this course. There are much better videos on Youtube and Lynda than this . I am sorry. I never thought it would be this bad. The first course on Python from University of Michigan was really very good.",1
95489,"The jupyter notebook made this a horrid experience. Plus Coursera really doesn't want you to bother them with your silly questions, relying on peer-forums. If you scroll through the week's discussion forums, many student posts go ignored.You can't drop the course past the second (I guess) week so the system will keep on keeping on long after you've given up on trying to figure out the janky notebook thing.Will not return to Coursera for any reason. Breathtakingly bad experience.",1
95490,"Very knowledgeable professors, but very little explanation or actual 'teaching'. Graded assignments require a lot of self-education.",1
95505,"Total disaster. I payed 315euro for this course. Course started on 24/10/2016. I faced with technical difficulties till this weekend. I reported this problem already many times.. Finally this weekend the Jupiter notebook worked and I started the first assignment. I spent many hours but still couldn't get solve the assignment. I read discussions, write post.. Searched on Google.. Read lots of document. I still couldn't get what the correct answer is the assignment wants. I realized that it is impossible to pass this exam. In the lectures they don't mention anything which will help you to solve this time consuming assignment by the way.. After having this terrible course experience this weekend, today (14/11/2016) I decided to apply for refund. But guess what I says 14 days have passed so I cannot get refund!!!! Now I payyed 315 euro for nothing but disappointment!!!!",1
95511,"besides the major technical issues and lack of information before the postponed start of the course and minor technical issues, the way of teaching is well adapted to on-site classes where you can sit in study groups solving the problems together; the given examples have partly little relevance and do not help to solve the assignments and according to the staff the best way to solve assignments is by using google (or stackoverflow or whatever) - really?! somehow it seems they just took an on-site course, played with some fancy technical solutions and call it now a MOOC... they seem not really aware of the fact that on-site teaching and MOOCs require completely different types of pedagogic methodsamazing how the same university can offer both the best MOOC (Dr. Chuck's) and one of the worst (this one)",1
95517,"This course is good but instructor is very bad..... Not providing good course lectures and materials... The lecture is very fast and not covering all the things being asked in the assignment... I am leaving this course due to this.. I have successfully done other python courses, because there, the instructor was very good and his teaching style was awesome...I have wasted lot of my times enrolling in this particular course... Though the course conception is good, instructor and course materials are not up to the mark....",1
95695,"This course proved to be a waste of time. There was nothing about the structure and forms of the strong quartet, just ""here's a good one to listen to."" Almost complete devoid of intellectual content.",1
95713,Great music but quizzes seem to come from footnotes to the lessons!,1
95752,"A good instructor and interesting assignments, but the information presented was quite shallow. I don't feel that I learned much from this course.",1
95763,"I can't finish the friggin' course. I can code fluently in HTML, CSS and Javascript, but can't figure out how to upload a PDF assignment here. This student's user experience is atrocious.",1
95770,"Assignments are ambiguously phrased and full of inconsistencies and typos. The last assignment does not provide feedback at all. It mainly felt like sitting in a lecture theatre getting a fragmented overview of the lecturer's work, while never gaining a real handle on the wider context, or what would have happened if an action hadn't been taken/had been performed differently. There was not enough further reading and no discussion of other people's work - such as a dissection of how a company might have arrived at a product we can actually identify in the wild.Rather than learning how I could tackle any project, I now know how to work on very specific examples of projects - if anything was to deviate from this, I'd still be clueless.Overall, the course feels haphazard and badly prepared.",1
95778,This course does not meet my needs and expectations. The content is very focused on engineering projects. The exercise demands a lot of time to understand the document. It would be better to slice it in many exercises associated with each week.,1
95784,"The material is very randomized, and the instructor presents it in an overly complex way.",1
95790,I could not understand instructor. Using subtitles didn't help either as many words came up unintelligible.,1
95802,"Boring voice. A lot of overcomplicated terms, where you can describe your idea in a much more simple way. In result i feel that lector read this material not to teach people, but just to read it. Disgusting.",1
95878,I posted questions and couldn't find any answer. The course also doesn't allow me to be creative (although it's about design!) in answering assignments.,1
95879,"I only did week one of the course and quit for the following reasons:Presentation of the content is too fast and provides little information among lots of noise. Most of what's said is generic keywords assembled in sentences that don't make much sense, or implies ""common sense"" evidences barely illustrated with vague figures and no sources to support them. It makes everything hard to follow for beginners and unconvincing for more advanced students.On top of that, I feel offended by the mysogynist examples and the underlying contradictory assumptions that designers outside of agile are basically incompetent while saying at the same time that they will just use methods they already know anyway.",1
95920,Frequent and forced peer reviews with no opportunity to complete once deadline is missed makes this course nu-necessarily difficult for people with conflicting schedules and responsibilities.,1
95958,"It is more like a Junit course in the beginning or as far as i could watch. The methodology is not very precise and I could think in a few enhancements.Still, I could recommend for those who want just a initial contact with the method. No more than this.",1
95972,"Course 1 was really enriching, but this second stage didn't achieve the level that it's supposed, videos should be remake in order to connect with learners, materials should be upgrade to fulfill expectations.",1
95977,The course content is presented in a very good way. It is explained in an understandable way and examples provide a good insight. The final assignment is ambiguously described. This is very frustrating if you invest a lot of time and recognize that all classmates proceeded in a different way.,1
96044,"Nice form, shallow content. Simply too simple. Beware: upgrade / fee required for last two exams.",1
96049,"I'd like to give just one star rating for this course, as it is very far from what I expected. The course expect students to know Python, to know R, but did not go deep enough to help students understand the insight from social media data. In fact, lots of R task can be replaced with Python, so the course could be designed in a much better way that students do not always switch between two programming environments. This course mainly teaches how to download data with keywords, and how to plot graph, not worth the effort of learning. Therefore, I would not recommend this course to anyone.",1
96050,"Far from being a real course, it need polishing, at this point it looks more like a basic tutorial with a few error, perhaps next versions will be better.",1
96077,"A rather non-engaged teacher ho does not know what goes on with the reviews. She does not have enough people to review the written assignment and the assignments go UN-reviewed leading to a 'no-grade' whihc is ridiculous. It is not even clear how the written reviews are graded. She is not involved and does not serve to inspect the work of the students to ascertain that a grade is in order. Three reviews are requited for a grade, but she has so few reviewers that one might only get one review and then fail. Very inept. Stay away from this one. She does not get involved with answering questions of students either. Her internet activity is rated a 2/5 whihc I did not know until I got involved with this course. Observation of the video showing her teaching is terrible. She places herself in front of the camera and one cannot see the placement of the student's fingers or most importantly what is actually happening on the fret board with the finger movement. She also places herself directly in front of the camera blocking a clear view of everything - poor video skills.",1
96116,The accent and rhythm of Jogesh makes it difficult to follow the course.There is no extra information in addition to the presentation. The teacher is only reading the slides which makes the experience quite limited/boring.The content is enough to get an idea of Bootstrap basic functionality.,1
96190,I don't like the teacher,1
96260,"I don't recommend this class. Jogesh K. Muppala has very labored English and his pace and verbosity make the lectures hard to get through. I've turned in around 10 assignments and have yet to get a grade on anything. The course content is poorly organized and executed. Peer grading is just dumb (and clearly doesn't work, since I have yet to get a single assignment back). When you turn in assignment files, they cannot be opened (and we found out from an apparent student how to get past the technical issues). Questions about the class and submitting assignments went unanswered. My advice, save your money and don't take this class.",1
96293,"It is too hard to understand what he is saying, his accent is impossible to follow. Besides, the lectures are not dynamic, it is just him reading the slides with the most monotonous and boring voice ever. I took the first course of the specialization with David and this is the complete opposite. I would love to see the whole 5 courses with David and not only the first one.",1
96418,"First, the assignments always had poor instructions. It wasn't until grading time you would find out what the criteria are. (After your assignment is submitted)Secondly, there was no documentation/help for the fact the Windows needs a webserver to run content in this section. (Many versions of Windows can't do this) Discovered/resolved over many hours, when course content would not work.The actual course content was sparse/not much to it other than ""Bootstrap bootstrap bootstrap."" After how good the first course was/how much ground it covered, this course was frustrating, poorly documented, and a disappointment.",1
96423,"Difficult to understand, not a good explainer.",1
96447,"So many powerpoint slides.. It's very boring course. The tutor just read slides without deep explanations, wikipedia much more interesting. It's just observing course, theoretical 95%.",1
96554,poor teacher..,1
96626,First course by David Rossiter set the bar very high. This is like going through a manual or series of instructions. Would like 2 courses to be taken by David and 2 by Jogesh...Else the style becomes very monotonous. The course by David was awesome. This is not as good,1
96671,Not the best tutor but perhaps one of the worst. Hard to understand what he's trying to say.,1
97055,"It was really boring, hard to keep watching the videos and doing the activities. There was some stuff that could be interesting but you can find it somewhere else.",1
97060,"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.",1
97069,"This was really disappointing.There is almost no connection between the experience of the lectures (and that's all the videos are - lectures that track a PowerPoint presentation) and the assignments, quizzes, etc. Reference and source materials are frequently mentioned in passing, but there is no comprehensive list of works cited anywhere. The assignments are often vaguely described and, in more than one case, were described entirely differently in different places.I have nothing good to say about this experience. You're watching a fundamentally disconnected series of mostly ad-hoc discussions of vague concepts. A simple list of books to read would be much more valuable.This is by far the worst MOOC I've taken, from any source, in any discipline. The fact that it actually costs money simply adds to the pain.",1
97102,"The content was VERY scarce, and it was obvously prepared in a hurry. This course just touches very superficially the subject to be studied. Not meeting minimum quality standards.",1
97103,In compare with first course of this specialization study materials are too few. Some lectures not longer then 2 !!!! minutes. The whole time of lectures 10-15 minutes,1
97131,Course was taught by people who gave no indication they had ever bought a security. They read flatly from the teleprompter and rarely looked at their audience. Very disconcerting and not conducive to trusting what is being said.,1
97170,"Not happy about the course. Very very general information. This can be obtained through any internet reading and doesn't require a purchase of the course. 79 dollars is not peanuts for many countries. The lecturers often refer to the videos which are not part of this course. Examples: PPP valuation has not been part of lectures, but is referred to. Maturity and duration of the bond comparison with the glass of water is referred to, but was not part of the course. For the money - we are getting some shorter version of a bigger course. Not satisfied at all. Just finished all the tests and passed, but not happy. Do not recommend to anyone and surely will not buy the next course.",1
97186,Beware - will make you upgrade to complete quizzes (and pay) - should definitely be much more upfront about this from the beginning.Seems like very poor tactics on their behalf.,1
97214,"Inconsistent course content, presenters hop between topics, complete lack of definitions, absense of content structure. Moreover, the presentation style is very boring. One thing is for sure - avoid attending finance at university of Geneva by all costs.",1
97253,"I am disappointed in the quality of the lectures in this course. They're too summarized -- too quick-- and they lack the thoroughness required to accurately convey the intuition the student needs to comprehend the lessons taught. When I have to spend a significant number of hours watching lectures on YouTube to compensate for the poor quality lectures offered in ""Understand Financial Markets"", I am left wondering why I enrolled in the specialization. I think Coursera needs to have a conversation with the professors at Geneva University about the need for prerequisites before allowing students to enroll in this specialization.",1
97642,it was halful,1
97657,I've taken this course for a while but prefered to stop as I found it very not academic in terms of ethics and objectivity. It spreads anxiety and takes too much liberty with History.,1
97732,It has nothing to do with widening network. It is completely misleading. This is just a very short course about office etiquette. That's it.I was very much looking forward to this course. Sadly I got very disappointed.,1
97919,This course is basically about watching uninspiring videos. It needs a lot of design thinking itself.I have bought the book however. It is really useful.,1
98050,shame you have to pay for this course although the content is good,1
98085,I am sorry but the Prof. doesn't know how to attract students to be more curious.,1
98117,"There are ideas we are all familiar with in this course. Good ones for a new teacher who may be oblivious but there is little concrete information about what those ideas look like in a class setting. For example, there might be a discussion of leadership or respect but no ideas about what those look like. It's a lot of teacher talk with no substance.",1
98154,"I want to bring it to Coursera's attention that this specialization on Conflict Management is poor quality, poor value and hardly any content. Week 1 is only a welcome lecture!! It is a 3-4 week course stretched out to 3 months so that students can be charged money $$$.It should not be a paid specialization. It does not meet Coursera's high standards. Can you please forward this review to the right person?",1
98197,Not very interesting or well-presented.,1
98199,This is a joke right?5 minutes long videos with questions after it shall teach me effective?!you guys are ridiculous!,1
98224,when you finish the course you won't be able to print out your certificate so don't even waste your time with this bs website. I am beyond pissed rn and I'm reporting this to everyone this a real comment about this course too.,1
98251,A little be difficult for me.,1
98325,"I would have given this course NO stars at all if that option were available!!!The course is designed in contradiction of all the principles it preaches--there are no forums for the students, there is no way you could contact the instructor, the instructor keeps reading badly, stammering like a first-grader, speaks monotonously and there's no interaction whatsoever!Furthermore, there are mistakes in the quizzes and you have to choose blatantly wrong options if you want to get the 100% score!Although the subject matter about Virtual Instruction is pretty interesting and the instructor made it sound like the most boring thing in the world!Many of the links are outdated or not working at all and often the documents she refers to are 10 or more years old. Bear in mind that Virtual Instruction is a fast developing field and the technology as well as the legal framework are changing very fast too.In a nutshell, if this course were not a part of a Specialization track, I would not have paid for it.Unless you want to do the specialization, I wouldn't recommend this course or any by the UC Irvine because all of the lack forums and no channels for communication with the instructors!!!In one word BAD!",1
98326,"Some materials are useful but the teacher has no idea of teaching techniques and good presentation. Very bad choice for the University of Irvin, California to entrust such an interesting course to such an incompetent and feeble instructor. She is reading in a monotonous way and nothing more. Her presentations have no meaning. She does not appear in the video lectures. She can not introduce animated elements. The materials she selected are sometimes and only somehow relevant. The most of the materials have only percentages, and small details on history. A course of poor quality.",1
98328,"A paradox that a course about virtual instruction is the worst course I've done on Coursera. I am on a verge of quitting it. 1. Despite lots of good information, there is no effort to present it in an interesting and engaging way. 2. Virtual educators say that the students should interact with the platform every 3-4 minutes and yet they give you 15 min video to listen to and look at the same picture. 3. No forums available but the notice about forums interrupts all the videos.",1
98329,"No option of completing the course without paying. So why do you call your site FREE online courses? And why do we have to go into the trouble of attending the class and watching the videos, and reading the material without being capable of at least watching our results in assignments?",1
98333,"Although the content is good, the course itself does not reflect in any way what a good asynchronous course should be. Where is the discussion board? How can one communicate with the instructor or with other classmates? Although peer review of an assignment is one aspect of asynchronous and synchronous education, said assignment should also be reviewed by an instructor, especially when said instruction carries so much weight. In addition, I think overall the tests are unfair. I was marked wrong twice for a question that asked my opinion! Also, in the ""check all that apply"" questions, if one misses one of the answers, the whole question is marked wrong. Finally, many of the test questions themselves are irrelevant to the content of the course. One last thing- the course says it's a five week program, but there are only 4 weeks. Something needs to be adjusted.",1
98441,"This course, and the Specialization as a whole, is poorly structured and a rather cursory overview that is unlikely to satisfy serious learners. If the material is completely new to you then it will likely leave you confused as it does not adequately explain the concepts. If you are already somewhat familiar and are looking for deeper dive into R and programming you will be disappointed as the courses just don't have the depth of material needed to gain mastery over the subject.Your money and time would probably be better spent on a couple of books by Wickham.",1
98484,"This course is not free. You must pay to access assignments and quizzes.I am really annoyed with the direction Coursera is moving in regard to premium content. If they keep up this trend, I'll move to Class Central or other MOOCs.",1
98497,Too theoretical and completely disliked it. Even too basic for an introductory course. I paid it and got unitl week 4 and just couldn't find the motivation to continue.,1
98504,Not recommended.,1
98513,Scattered lectures that are hard to follow and choppy,1
98516,"content is not good, too scattered content, cannot find focus.assignments are meaningless.",1
98558,Too abstract and unroganized,1
98681,"Was expecting soo much more from the entire courses. Not a single practical part, soo much talk and write.Sorry would not share the course with friends, 190€ is too much for what I have just learned.",1
98699,"The course tests are at times partially unrelated to the content of the lessons. In the test of Lesson 7 we are asked if removing jargon from an analysis makes the analysis clearer. This is never mentioned in the course.The question does not have a unique yes/no solution. It depends on the context, in particular on the audience of the analysis and report. If I'm talking to technical people who knows a lot about the topic jargon can be useful, on the other hand if jargon is not documented it can be confusing.How are we supposed to know this?This is just one example, but all the courses of the EDS specialisation had these issues. I don't know if it is a language barrier or what but I feel that I didn't have a chance to study more to get a better score. You either happen to have the same idea of the teacher or you don't, and this is not professional.",1
98713,very bad and not organised,1
98716,"It is a poor course because is not properly designed for internationals. Language is mainly French in slides and subtitle is not that helpful.Instead of spending time outside to read the notes, it was better to prepare helpful slides for students to understand better what you are talking about.",1
98755,The first three weeks of this course is ok. The last assignment is very poorly structured with uninformative instructions.,1
98831,Extremely boring and very confusing,1
98855,"Seems like the quality of this specialization goes down with every course. The instructor is not showing us the way we should think about developing programs in NodeJS, but he insists on using PowerPoint slides to show us how to code! It's 2016, and there are way better mediums for communicating with your students. Simply copying and pasting code and explaining what every line does is not the right way of teaching any concept, especially when you are dealing with a new technology. For the start, the instructor can actually type the code and explain what goes through his mind during each step. That way anyone can follow his problem solving methods and benefit from the course.I had to take other online courses on Code School and Pluralsight just to understand what's going on, and later come back to finish the homework.",1
98947,"Totally unimpressed. Video lectures are terrible. Explanations are at best incomplete, usually confusing, sometimes incoherent. Instructor never gives an overview of the architecture/data flow/structure of Active Record or Action Pack, instead describes the syntax of a handful of functions. As a result you only get the most superficial understanding of the material. The graded assignments are just a regurgitation of the lectures and so don't require you to take a deeper dive into the material. In fact, in many cases the answers to the graded assignments are listed in the assignment immediately following the question.",1
98956,Could have been much better ....should have been a proper video tutorial,1
98964,"Content of the course is great! But if you get stuck in a problem no one responds or guides you. For practice purpose just take the free version, paid version is not worth taking, as you will not get any additional guidance or support to do assignments when stuck.",1
99003,bad instructor,1
99043,"The marking scheme for essays is filth ! I was not even informed what the passing mark is before I received my grade ,all the instructions for assignments are absurdly unclear! Also the "" professor "" 's English is terrible.",1
99206,The peer-review rubrics need adjustments.. it's very hard to grade anyone this way. Especially when the answers are just wrong.The staff/teachers/instructors CAN BE A LOT MORE INVOLVED ON THE FORUM!,1
99223,"Positive: Very interesting and informative lectures and subject matter.Negative: Fellow ""students"" who have no knowledge of the subject (other than what they themselves are learning) are required to submit case studies for ""peer review"" by other students who have no more knowledge of the subject than they do. These case studies are heavily weighted and if the person is reviewed negatively (for whatever reason), they must resubmit it never knowing why they were given low scores or what the correct answer should have been. No instructor assistance is given. Huge turn-off for me and many of my fellow students. I want to withdraw (drop) this class and take another with more clearly drawn parameters.",1
99225,"This is a nice effort, and it obvious how hard everyone has worked. There are too many presumptions presented as 'facts', though, and too much certainty about research issues that lots of debate is still going around. So, good work, but unless the course is supposed to attract only ignorants and people that haven't been in contact with 'science', some of the instructors act a bit 'I know it all' and that is how it is, although no-one does yet. Sorry to discover this spirit in here.",1
99226,"While the course is very interesting, I found the peer review process unsatisfying. I did not enjoy grading others without knowing if I was right. Grading a fellow student on their accuracy when I don't know if they are actually wrong is something I never want to do again. After completing the course, I had hoped to learn if any of my assignments were actually correct. I am disappointed in the outcome.",1
99235,"i can not unenroll this course, it's very terrible",1
99595,"This course was a extremely introductory course in excel. I would not recommend it to anyone, especially at the cost of $95. Aside from getting yourself thinking about using Excel and some minor lessons learned, I found it to be a complete waste of time.",1
99619,"Really basic spreadsheet knowledge, not to be recommanded for anybody who is already familiar with Excel.",1
99639,"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.",1
99650,"The tests were not upto the mark, where the questions were not very logical and the options were confusing.",1
99652,"I had great expectations, but the course focuses on really basic stuff. If you have worked with spreadsheets before, it won't help much. If you haven't, it will not teach you how to use it.",1
99662,"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.",1
99673,"The qiuz are managed terribly, full of error and I seriously doubt the professor ever seen these quiz before. The Course suit for a beginner but a bit fragile, I expect more about building a usable model. This course need serious review.",1
99674,Nothing new and no challenging exercises. It could be more interactive,1
99678,"This course needs a total overhaul; in its current state it is a detriment to both Coursera and the Wharton Online brand. First, there was relatively little content; there was less than an hour of lectures each week and no actual programming involved. Second, the material was pitched at a very basic level, but not in a good way. Third, the tests didn't manage to even test the material being covered. For example, when given a mean and stdev, when asked to find a value, often the lecture would use an approximation ( i.e., a 2-tailed 95% distributed = 2.00 std devs. ) This is a class on excel: there is NO excuse for not introducing norm.s.inv and norm.s.dist when asking that question. When the test required the ""approximation"" rather than the exact calculation? Everything about this course was wrong, it needs to be scrapped and thrown away.",1
99684,"Very poor course. Low depth of teaching, assignments awfully developed.",1
99690,"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.",1
99739,I wasn't impressed...v few or new material,1
99777,"The course gives some ideas about time management. However, it takes more time utilising these methods of planning, checking the plans, planning extra work and risks than actually do the work.It is impossible to multitask, let's go back to monotask.",1
99805,"Terrible course compared to all others I've seen on Coursera.Content is scarce, quality is low, maybe okay for college graduates, but being in business, it's just too slim.Video quality is also terrible. Don't waste 35$",1
99811,"Unfortunately, without a doubt, the worst und most uninformative course I've ever taken. Apart from stating the obvious nothing new. A lot of repetition of ""useless"" information. Super disappointed. Can't believe that such a course is offered here and that I really paid for nothing of such quality.",1
99818,Muy poca información.Very few information.,1
99864,This course would be much better if there was some actual substantive content. This course was not worth 35$.,1
99909,Dearth of any specific / practical tools.,1
99932,$35 for this? duh,1
99954,"Coursera stands for its rich courses. This one is an exception, one of the worst I've ever seen so far. It's like reading a bad inspirational book. No system, no methods in place.",1
99975,nothing new,1
100038,very boring and uninteresting delivery..,1
100072,"I do not recommend you to waste your time. Planned course activities for a week - just 13 minute speech of the lecturer, telling absolutely banal things and a few questions. Absolutely useless.",1
100159,All very basic.,1
100186,Very simplistic concepts and tactics which are already known to most of us who have been working for a while. It might be useful for somebody who is just starting to work.,1
100233,"The provided material is good, but not good enough to be called a 'course'. It seems more like a 'talk', not a 'course'. I suggest to add more materials, or merge with other courses.",1
100235,Teaching should really be improved.,1
100284,Unfortunatelly I did not get anything from this course. The course was based on a few obvious tips you get from any self-help or management book.,1
100319,I dont recommend this course to anyone.The course content is not up-to-the mark.,1
100362,"I soon got bored with the simplistic solutions, lack of challenge, and frankly, a condescending attitude. I then took all the quizzes, guessed or surmised the answers, got 100% right, and went on to something more productive.",1
100367,Very basic and trivial information that can be easily summarized in an article. Not need for a whole course.,1
100384,Very poor course. Not at all academically rigorous. Just a bunch of common sense statements. Instructor's presentation style borders on condescending.,1
100440,"Didn't like the course though did only one week. In the first week you are supposed to write a research proposal. Though there is a lot of talk on what research is, no actual advice is given on how to write a sound research statement. What's more, with no knowledge on how to do it, you are supposed to assess the works of your peers. I doubt that inexperienced in research beginners will provide valuable feedback - at least I would never do it if I hadn't been quite experienced in that. The second week is devoted to the discussion of the importance of literature review. Isn't that obvious?",1
100450,"It is like for kids, I think all courses must mention their target audience. Contents, Videos, talks nothing was value for time.",1
100461,Really Didn't like the course.,1
100516,TOO SUPERFICIAL,1
100559,Staff are incredibly arrogant bordering on aggressive. The very worst of the pontificating profession - and what we long term learners and educators know to be all too common. I couldn't stand it so I stopped. Would never recommend.,1
100642,":The course capstone was very disappointing. it has nothing to do with business and financial modeling, it is nothing more than a very questionable portfolio construction exercise on optimized weights and parameters. Not only such a portfolio is pretty unrealistic, but it has nothing to do with business modeling!",1
100650,"Seemed like the Capstone was rushed and turned into an Investment Management course...I signed up to practice business finance modeling not investment management. The instructors did not present any further information and referred students to third-party resources (ie, Investopedia and Youtube). Many students in the forums voiced their frustration. Disappointing course with little added value, and in my opinion, hurts Wharton's image.Overall, the Wharton Online Business Finance Modeling Specialization is not worth the ~US$550. If I could I would ask for a refund.",1
100733,"The lessons are not very clear and have almost no examples. To make matters worse, the discussion forums were closed so you could not ask anything to clarify things, so it was very difficult to learn things here.",1
100747,"Quality of the video and sound are bad; a few minutes after starting a lesson, sound goes off or picture holds and moves no more... This made me stop the course.",1
100763,No forum + No email + No support whatsoever = Very frustrating,1
100786,Where is the material? There is nothing under any of the weeks lectures.,1
100793,"Extremely light on information, no discussion forums.",1
100823,"Not worth the money. The material is weak ,and the peer-grading process is very casual.",1
100980,"Not aligned to PMI. Should be ideally directed towards helping prepare for recognized certifications like PMP, Prince2 etc.",1
101094,"I enjoyed the other courses in this specialization, but the capstone was disappointing. The course was not very structured and did not draw from the other courses in a substantial way. It was often difficult to see how the readings related to the projects. The course could use a lot more curation and direction.",1
101103,The whole course is nice and there were lot of new things to learn. I am not from an IT background but still found it very useful. However the capstone was a bit of disappointment. I believe they should have included some teaching authority to check the Capstone projects for my better understanding. The whole capstone is reviewed by peers which is great but as per certification I believe there should be some professional help too. I even tried to speak to someone over the phone but there was no number available. I ended up with chatting with some one on the help center but that was not very helpful either. The course content for operation analytics and People Analytics were indeed very useful. Thanks.,1
101108,"As others have said, the first four courses were good - I learned a lot from the videos and materials. However, the capstone project was a waste of time. Why a company failing in its industry was chosen as the focus is beyond me. In addition, the concepts learned in the previous four courses were only about 1/3 of the requirements of this capstone project - the problem statement and strategy portions could have been done without having taken the four previous courses at all. This seemed like a very generic project with almost no collaboration between the professors who taught the previous four courses. I expected a lot more from a Wharton-led course - very disappointing.",1
101109,The preceding courses were interesting and helpful. This capstone project lacked substance. The project did not allow itself to apply many of the concepts learned throughout the course. It's almost exclusively about customer analytics. I would not be surprised if Yahoo! worked with Wharton and Coursera to launch this course in order to crowd-source ideas on how to turn around the company.,1
101111,"This course was terribly underwhelming. There is no interaction from the Wharton staff, nothing that connects this to anything learned in the specialization, and nothing that even resembles a case study. Grades are subjectively assigned on a very narrow grading scale by peers and the format of the assignment doesn't allow for enough explanation to develop a thesis. of Any information given to the student is from magazine/newspaper/journal articles without data and we are tasked with identifying a business solution to a problem with little context. Very disappointed in this offering. After taking the Data Analysis specialization offered through Duke University I know what a capstone course should be and this course is so far from that it should be removed from the course catalog.",1
101119,Provided nothing of value or relevance to the previous courses. Additionally there was essentially no input from Wharton instructors.,1
101123,"From my perspective, the individual courses that made up the ""Capstone"" (people, customer, accounting, and operations analytics) were both educative and interactive. These individual courses contained data focused problems and gave a general overview of the specific field.However, the final ""Capstone"" project was entirely disappointing and something I even plan to complain to Coursera about. After having a two month delay, the course not only lacked any direction, but seemed to be put together last minute without any real thought or plan. The entire ""Capstone"" was driven by hypotheticals, almost all of which did not have any relevance to the past four courses. An educated individual could easily complete this ""Capstone"", without any knowledge whatsoever from the previous four courses. The ""Capstone"" provided a few articles and videos related to the issue (Yahoo Ad Blocker) to help us solve the problem, but clearly the course heavily lacked content. I was expecting the course to contain hypothetical data for us to interact with and predict how the Ad blocker problem and our proposed solutions would drive the data of Yahoo's business. However, the course merely was driven by complete hypotheticals that only required one to be educated about general business functions. This ""Capstone"" hardly related to the previous four courses, and it is a scam that this course cost $99.",1
101309,"this course is very basic, provides a lot of information that's not really practical or useful. i suppose someone who's seeing internet for the first time would find it informative, but not very engaging. as for the majority of those who use coursera to self-educate it would probably seem a bit too much of stating the obvious. also I'd like to mention the delivery of the information - its a text that's read aloud. nothing more - well, thanks for that. I can read faster than I can listen to a video. if you're making a video - make it worth actually WATCHING.",1
101473,"I do not intend this to be mean, but I could not listen to Richard Waterman. I am British and I understand that Richard was born in the UK but spent a great many years in the US. If he had a BritiI really struggled to listen to him as his accent crosses the Atlantic several times a sentence. I found I couldn't listen to WHAT he was saying because I was so distracted by HOW he was saying it. I am sorry, there is probably nothing that he can do about it and the course looked very interesting but I simply could not bring myself to continue.",1
101515,"The course is poor. Exams are too easy, video lessons are boring and not engaging. Content is poor too. Did not like the course.",1
101564,"You will learn nothing from this. The teacher is useless and you only get peer-feedback. While I usually love peer feedback, I lost all interest so quickly.",1
101567,"There was little of actual teaching going on in this course, the pace was too rushed for beginners and peer-reviewing was managed so poorly it was unhelpful.",1
101592,"this course will make you write a script... and that's it, if you want to LEARN how to write a script, don't take this course.This course just push you to write a script without clearly teaching you what to do, if you want to learn, look for another course (I took one from futurelearn.com while in this course, it's free, this one is a waste of money if you pay)",1
101594,"I'm sorry, but I have taken many courses on Coursera and this is, without a doubt, the absolute worst. This isn't minimal teaching, it's practically nonexistent. Frankly, buying a book would at least give more guidance than tossing one-minute 'lectures' out there and having students blindly fend for themselves under the guise of ""experimental learning"".Plus, you then have an all or nothing grade system - there is no middle ground, just pass or fail on an assignment that had little to no instruction or examples listed to begin with.I'm truly surprised that Coursera agreed to allow this course as it is. I suggest that the instructor and team see how other instructors at universities are teaching their Coursera courses. Just because something is free, it doesn't give free reign to be lazy. If I had paid for it, I would have asked for a refund. This entire course needs a serious revamp.",1
101598,"What a lazy excuse of a course. Why would you call it a course? Just call it ""Start Writing"" and put it on a blog. No guidance, no tips, no effort whatsoever. Without any guidelines, how does review from a fellow novice help? It's like blind leading the blind.I'll go with the minimalist style of this course and use just one word to describe it: Rubbish.",1
101601,"I should suggest my fellow Coursera students not to waste their money and time for this course. You'll learn a lot more than this course has to offer if you consult some websites with screenwriting tutorial blogs, read books and write on your own.I am a PhD student of theoretical film studies and and a fan of Coursera courses. I was eager to learn screenwriting as an interesting hands-on course. Well, it's project-based alright, but where's the real guidance??This is a lazily designed course with poor content and almost zero guidance. The videos are very short and feels like a layman is trying to motivate you to write something, that's all. No methods explained other than some terminologies like bible, acts, outline being thrown at you. No examples, no comparisons, no detailed approaches.Lastly, scriptwriting has a significant difference with other humanities course. Being peer-reviewed doesn't help here -- a total novice can not effectively judge another newbie's work nor give them quality feedback.",1
101610,"There is no instruction with this course. If you've never written a script before you're not going to get a lot of help here other than researching things yourself, which you can do without this course. Not to mention, the feedback is minimal and not all that helpful. For example. if i've never written a script, what value am I to someone else who has also never written a script. And what value is their feedback to me. I signed up to get some experience and to also get feedback from those more experienced than I. I'm less interested in what my peers have to say and more interested in the feedback of the instructor who has years more experience than most of us. To pass assignments off of 4 or 5 peer reviews is worthless. There's no value in that. What does the instructor think??? Would HE pass us? He occasionally drops a line in the discussion forum, but no direct feedback to the students.I think this class should have a cap on enrollment so that the instructor can actually review and provide feedback to the students. Joke's on anyone paying $49 to essentially teach yourself. This guys just sits back and ""moderates"" when he can.The best thing about this class is that it does force you to write, but beyond that, it's not helpful at all. Truly disappointing.",1
101611,"The instructor says in the first video: ”you do not need to read a book on how to write a script” – in my opinion YOU DO! Better to read a book or two than waste your time on this course; the videos are extremely short, shallow and a waste of time!",1
101616,"No significant instruction/teaching provided. Appears to function only as a self-directed workshop, which doesn't teach the craft itself. Disappointing.",1
101617,There isn't any real teaching happening. I guess this isn't a course for beginners.,1
101650,"I don't know what happened but it seems they had technical or some other problem while preparing this course. Some assignments were more oriented to solving marginal problems then using Spark and distributed and parallel computing. And that is really annoying. Previous 3 courses were great, maybe this one will improve.",1
101716,"Slow videos repeating several times the same thing (not a pedagogical / ""good to fix an idea"" kind of repetition), which makes them hard to follow.However the worst are the exercises: the first time after 3-4 other Coursera Scala related courses where I have to actively check the forums for minute details about what is expected / implied for the solutions to pass the grading.Things like what to do when updating the kmeans and you have duplicates, subtle differences between average and mean, etc. ...In all other courses the expectation of the exercises were sufficiently clear and straight forward that I never had to check the forums to solve them.Also, the code style of the exercises is literally an anti-pattern in idiomatic Scala, against everything learnt in the previous Scala courses: ""var"" all over the place, low level loops like in C or Java, etc. ...",1
101819,Bad one. Most of the time he was only giving what is their in the course Mooc 1 2 3etc etc. Irritated,1
101824,"a little bit old, and too many references to others courses",1
101843,"Not that much techniques to learn just general course about social media,So it's not cost effective !",1
101876,"There are no clearly defined learning outcomes at the start of each video which are cramped with stats and facts and statements such as ""you will learn more about this in mooc 2"" and ""this will be talked about extensively in mooc 3"". As a learner its confusing to know what to take out of each video.The extend to which students are used to promote the course by prompting them to tweet about the videos is a concern. Ones or twice is okay. But every time?The assignment is a miss - students should be given a choice whether they want to focus on marketing their professional personas or marketing their business.I can summarize MOOC 1 in one sentence. Social Media is big and therefore business must change the way they do marketing.",1
101908,"Very basic for the cost it represents, it doesn't really provide information beyond what one could find on a simple review on the first page of Google.",1
102054,too many grading errors.,1
102177,"It provides a broad overview, but materials are not very refined and the course does not provide a good structured approach to the subject. At least it did not for me, leaving me wondering as to what next steps could be if I wanted to explore further.",1
102226,"after watching so many videos like ""how i got started on seo"" ""how to find a job as seo"" ""how to answer in an interview for SEO jobs"" I've realized this course really needs to focus on what people wants to hear. We want to learn SEO not how someone got started on seo!",1
102275,Course Academy and historic,1
102327,"Unfortunately, this wasn't what I expected from the course. Maybe since I didn't take specialization but I feel that this course was too theoretical. I understand the history of SEO but I'm not confident how useful it'll be in real-life/commercial sense.",1
102387,"I have a negative opinion of the structure of this course. It is not laid out in a format that I, a native English speaker, understood. The interviews and recorded lectures were not adequate or sufficiently rehearsed. The gentleman that drills his own cavities in his home workshop was most annoying and pointless. Looked at the ceiling Buddha 97% of his screen time.The reading was too disjointed and the book on Mindfulness is really more commercial and repetitious that one would expect of a course in Coursera. Professor Wright is too laconic, phlegmatic and unengaging. I wrote the assignment for week three but there were no instructions on how to convert a document in textedit (Mac WP) to the course submission page so that was a total crash for me. I would never recommend this course to anyone.",1
102487,"Video after video of lengthy lecture with little variation. It's a long content dump with just two peer-reviewed assignments. If this is the best online Princeton can do, count me out.",1
102537,"Worst course I have ever seen on Coursera. Such a shame, as the subject is very exciting, and the 'lectures' in the first couple of weeks are a monotonous jabble.",1
102544,A waste of my time.,1
102593,"Smile on the face of professor is missing, otherwise 5 stars.",1
102649,"Very very introductory. This course explores the Buddhist theory of suffering and liberation by comparing it to evolutionary psychological theories.It is not a deep course on Buddhism - it lacks any substantive discussion of differences between Buddhist schools, of the difficulty of reconstructing the ""historical"" Buddha (a problem as difficult as reconstructing the ""historical Christ""), of the fact that Buddhism as popularized in the West is actually quite different from any of the Asian forms of Buddhism, etc.Also, evolutionary psychology is controversial in its own right - one criticism of it is that it creates ""just-so"" stories about the origins of mental processes that are impossible to verify (or falsify). These objections are well known, but are not confronted in the course.A scholarly much sounder and deeper course is the one on Tibetan Buddhism from University of Virginia. It suffers from truly appalling presentation (the video lectures are some of the most boring I have ever watched), but the diversity of angles from which Buddhism is examined, and the depth of content are really outstanding.",1
102682,"All lecture, no use of media",1
102726,I am just not feeling this course. I have done up to week five and still am not hooked. Sorry!,1
102863,Material for the course is outdated.,1
102869,"Without a doubt the worst course I have ever taken anywhere. When the instructor, who is supposed to be teaching you how to write iOS apps, takes (no exaggeration) SIX minutes to even figure out how to open XCode, you know you're in for a rocky ride. Still, I stuck with it for three more weeks. To my horror, the course only got worse from there.This course was clearly thrown together with a minimum of effort by someone who is not qualified to teach the subject. It's an insult to Coursera customers, and a major failure of quality control.",1
102876,"The material and videos are so poor, and low quality, I am happy to not have bought this course",1
102895,"$450 for this course and they can't even bother to make sure that the quizzes are scored correctly? Two weeks back to back and one question each week has been counted wrong when answered correctly. That, paired with the fact that your only method to have an assignment graded is via peer review means that I'll be suggesting peers save their money on this course. It's entirely possible that you could be stranded with no one to grade your work - Coursera's suggestion if this should occur is that you should beg on the forums - or transfer your work to a later session of the same course. Good content, awful policies intended to allow the platform to be hands-off for Coursera - that's unacceptable at this price.",1
102980,"Content is very condensed - but fine.However, you need to pay to do the quizzes and even the peer assessment - something where you are contributing by reviewing other participants work. Charging me for supporting other participants and supporting a 'learning community mindset' seems ridiculous to me.",1
103018,"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.",1
103033,"The material is interesting and new, on that part the instructor is doing a good job.What is really VERY annoying about this course is the fact that in case you have questions/problems relating anything of the course material and you (as said by the instructor) post them to the discussion forums, there is COMPLETELY NO REPLY neither from the instructor, nor from the Coursera.There were obvious mistakes in one of the quizzes and lots of students were posting and discussing this in the forums (as this was actually preventing students from passing the course), but there was no answer whatsoever.I find this very unprofessional, especially because of the fact that this was a paid course. I do not know (and I also do not care) who is responsible for this - Coursera or the instructors, but this is something that should not be present in any of the courses on Coursera.I liked the first course very much, but the mentioned part of the second course was so annoying that I really would not recommend taking this course to new students.Sorry.",1
103050,"Very poor. Full of errors in videos and quizzes (which affect final grade), no response from course organizers in the forum to multiple complaints from learners, and extremely thin on content. Could have been merged into the first course of the specialization (Introduction to SEO).I've taken $49 one-off certificate classes that provided 4-10 hours of content for 6-8 weeks; for this course I was charged $119 for 1-3 hours of content for what was supposed to be 4 weeks. I completed the course in a couple of days and felt like I learned more from free resources like Moz. Complete rip-off and easily the worse course of the half dozen I've taken on Coursera on various topics. It seems like you're paying for the UC Davis name on the certificates rather than the content.In addition to all that they dropped the price from $119 to $79 per course for the specialization after I paid for it, and refuse to refund the price difference. Fine - but if I'm paying a premium price I expect much better content and service than was received.",1
103077,"This course is the least content rich of the series, so far. Seemed basic to me, but maybe that's because my background is communication and content strategy.",1
103100,"This is a very badly adjusted curse for the Coursera frame - I've encountered several quiz questions where I was supposed to write an answer in, but this option was not activated for me.Moreover, this course is dramatically prolonged - while the information provided can be easily put into 1-2 days, a week the most, it is somehow is stretched into 5 weeks. Taking into account that the course in a list of measures for a successful weight loss, it's justified to provide the strategies sooner in order to help those willing to start losing weight start doing that. The remaining 5 weeks would be great to help the students track their progress and get some peer-support.The system of not being able to submit any assignment or quiz until you pay for the course is vastly uncomfortable. the ability to self-check the weeks passed should be provided otherwise.The assignments for peer-grading are unnerving - how should peers grade my weight-goals? This is a direct ground for further body-shaming.The course is unfortunately very primitive and lacks further user-friendly design and review.",1
103224,"That's terrible! I can't see any English subtitles added to this course. Besides, tests are not relevant to the content taught in the video.",1
103261,poor quality and even worse presentation by the teacher,1
103306,"Sorry, but the course is very poor. I've watched all the videos of the first week and it's mostly about nothing. And, by the way, too much stories. And I'm still wondering why simpke brainstorming is called ZiZoZi (""new"" approach as it described).",1
103315,"This course ""talks"" about a really important subject. - that is probably one of its key benefits.I got really passionate and worked hard on the theme, and after completing I felt that It did not gave or matched the expectations on the course name/subject .Benefits:1)Important theme ( within business context) discussed with good videos and references2)Historical perspective on Creativity is sound3)Prof. Shlomo Maital is a warm, highly informed and passionate person about the subject.4)The course in week 2 and 3 makes you think on your one key creativity processesAnd it almost stops there since the purpose of the course gets flawed by the lack of requirements in the peer review, supporting materials and forum ""health"" that is why the course talks does fail in training/ teaching.Key points to not advice this course - at least in the paid version - see until n.51) Lack of support materials2) Support based on the ZIZOZI book to be bought outside of the course cost3)Reading of the ZIZOZI book in the context of the course ( with some answers to the quizzes being in the book and not in the course material)4) Dive into very interesting methods made only superficially ( Da Vinci Method, IDEO pex) with needs to be explained further.5) Complete or near complete lack of requirements for the classification of the peer review, making it very flawed ( see the definition of scalability per example and how to rank it)6) Forum use and reply almost near nullnessI do expect this course to be revised deeply in its execution. ( See per example Agile from Darden to benchmark).",1
103318,"Extremely repetitive with little to no visual interest. Needs to be cut down to about one tenth the presentation time. There are no visual representations, no exercises and no interactivity.This is the most repetitive MOOC I have ever taken and I've taken a great many.",1
103329,"The course is interesting but at the same time quite repetitive. There are many examples in it, but they are all high level examples which are not really going into the details of the creative process.The high level process proposed is good, but it is into the details where the processes fails, and there are no detailed examples here.By far, the worst thing related to this course is the peer review. they define rules which nobody respects and the scoring system is subjective and badly defined. I really regret my decision to join this specialization and the waist of money.",1
103331,Repeats the same information over and over,1
103338,"Not really well produced for the media. Too much instruction of the teacher, few practice instead.",1
103356,Its a very superficial course. It feels like the instructor is just reading out from some material. And it is not making it interesting to listen. The instructor is not putting in much effort to make student understand the concept. That's the reason for me to drop out in between the course. This course is not at all much informative and neither it is improving my grasp on the topic.,1
103364,The worse course ever,1
103366,"I would not recommend this specialization to anyone. The first assignment is just a first review of the final project, but it is almost impossible to pass, because the questions are not organized in a manner of constructive feedback.",1
103377,Could not finish the course. I found the course to be boring.,1
103429,"I do not want to rate this course at this stage but I would like to make the following comment in relation to the course resources and in particular the answers to the exercises in the optional text book.For students who do not have a copy of the text book, providing answers to questions from the text book without showing the actual questions is not very useful and to be quite frank, ridiculous. I would like to think that the course designers would take some sort of appropriate action to remedy this.How exactly this would be done is up to the course designers but I would suggest that another downloadable PDF document showing all the questions would be extremely useful and necessary.I look forward to a response.Regards, Trevor Farley",1
103453,"A shame it is part of the cybersecurity specialization. It is boring and full of obvious-psicology things like ""passwords need to be secure but easy to remember"". The instructor, at least, seems to have zero knowledge about software development. Everything we did in seven weeks could have been taught in one or two.",1
103468,"I am having a very difficult time finishing this course. I find the topic dull and the content uninteresting. It is the first course of the CyberSecurity Specialization .. I hope the other courses are not like this.I rated it one star for a couple of reasons.1- I have been in software for many years and I know about software design. I would NOT have expected to have a weeks long course on software design and usability when my desire is to learn about software security. I understand its importance, but this course should be part of a UI design course, NOT in a technical CyberSecurity specialization IMO.2 - the course is all about theory, not about practical matters. Let's admit it - today's security software is not for the uninformed/experienced. Given this, again, I feel this course would be better served in another specialization about UI Design or for software design best-practices.That is my .02. I am moving onto other courses before finishing the Usability Security..... I am aware that I will have to complete this course to get my certification. This alone will discourage me from purchasing a specialization in the future.",1
103494,Bad sound quality,1
103495,"Honestly i only finished week 1. I was sorely disappointed that the quizzes were locked. I wasn't aware that if you audit the course you were not allowed to complete the quizzes as other courses offer this option. From what I gather from week 1 the course topics seems really good. I think it would be great if you consider letting persons who audit take the quizzes otherwise what's the use - I mean i could always go on youtube and watch videos on the same topics, the difference with coursera courses is that you get the opportunity to test the knowledge gained by doing quizzes and assignment. I hope you will consider allowing everyone to take the quiz. My issue above is the reason why I gave the course a 1 out of 5.",1
103503,This is the first course that will only let you grade the quiz if you purchase the course. Highly disappointed...,1
103512,"This course have very little to do with actual security. Most of the time you will hear about how to design applications, and what is a good design policy.",1
103538,"This was an extremely elementary and thus disappointing course. While the importance of ""Usability"" was rightly emphasized, the representation in terms of examples, case studies, etc. was simplistic. I appreciated having my attention drawn to the pitfalls of HCI design and the consequent failure of the corresponding systems. However, the solutions were presented as if: 1.) there are always ""correct"" interface/usability choices; 2.) the ""correct"" choice is all that's needed for the system to be optimally functional; and 3.) there is never a tension between usability and effective functioning of a system (that can't be resolved with correcting the usability).It is irresponsible to suggest, for example, that a user selected memorable password is generally adequately secure without also covering ways that an interface can guide/nudge the user to create a secure password. Wide recognition of the importance of this may be more recent than the studies covered in the course. There is nothing wrong with studying old, seminal research, even in this age of ""Internet time,"" but I wish I wasn't left wondering what, if any, developments had occurred in the decade or so since that research took place.As for tension between usability and security, it absolutely exists. For instance, PGP encryption is a reliable way to secure information, yet making it usable remains a challenge. This is not even mentioned in the entire course. In fact, this course would leave an otherwise uninformed student believing that there are usability solutions waiting to be applied to every cause of info insecurity if the techies would just look. I wish the course had at least acknowledged that there are cases where a slight compromise on usability might be necessary for the sake of appropriate security.Lastly, for those designing an HCI for security, it is important to understand threat models. This concept is also missing from the course.===I reviewed this course (above) immediately after I finished it. I am now in the 3rd week of Software Security, the 2nd course in the Cybersecurity specialization, and am realizing that 2 stars was a generous assessment. Based on the prerequisites of the Software Security course, the Usable Security course, in its current form, is too elementary to be appropriate for people who have the experience/knowledge required for the rest of the courses in this specialization. As I explained above, the course relies heavily on decade-old research but does not cover any developments since. For instance, the usability issues covered in the studies are for ancient versions of browsers with no discussion of how the browsers and our infosec vulnerabilities have changed since those studies were published. Another example is the instructor's eschewing of password managers while many knowledgeable folks in the infosec community today recommend their use. The usability challenges of password managers and a discussion of how they might be mitigated would have been more appropriate.",1
103557,"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.",1
103563,"The entirety of this course can be taught in a few sentences. If there is too great a sacrifice to productivity for the sake of security, then people will find a way around any security mechanisms in place. If something is difficult to use, then people will likely not use it.",1
103623,This course was way too basic. The instructor basically just gave us links to existing web content. Very disappointed in the course. It felt like the instructor was lazy to develop a real curriculum.,1
103627,"Although this course is admittedly an introduction to UX, it is still very underwhelming. Priced at £39, the course materials that are spread to 5 weeks could easily be done in 1 or maximum 2 weeks. It is hard to justify that for example ""week"" 5 consists of a 7mins long video and a simple quiz... ""Week"" 4 is 15mins... Overall, I felt let down by the lack of materials and assignments (no hand-on experience can be gained, no peer -graded assignments).",1
103669,"don't waste your time, just touch supper surface about this technologies, most time just mention the name of these technologies",1
103678,Not a very informative course. A few hours' worth of reading up specs that I can also find on Wikipedia.,1
103688,Too much version specific details.Instructor was reading slides vs explaining the technologies ( telling a story )The Quiz part cant be more lame,1
103691,This is probably one of the worst courses I've taken in Coursera.Just an enumeration of what's on each version of the operative systems and few more information.,1
103696,"I feel that I wasted my time and money on this course to be very honest. Should have requested a refund when I could. The professor really doesn't put in the effort like other professors on Coursera. He is literally reading out the content on each slide. The content isn't very enlightening either, it's just facts about mobile technology and their release dates. One can read that up on wikipedia I honestly think this course should be taken off this platform so no one else falls for it as I did. If you're reading this before you enroll, don't do it, don't waste your time and money on this.",1
103709,"This course has nothing to do with ""emerging technologies."" The course is essentially a quick history of Android and iOS smartphones that could be learned by browsing Wikipedia.",1
103716,Sorry but this is awful. Literally just reading from some very high level slides no dept to the course. I cannot recommend this course in its current state.,1
103717,just reading the materials,1
103718,I though the class focused too much on enumerating various names of technologies rather than describing them in depth.,1
103722,"Honestly, this course was a waste of time. The professor seems to have gathered some information about the version history of iOS and android platforms, thrown it onto some slides, and then reads from those slides. There is no discussion of the context of those technologies.",1
103725,"Generic history information, nothing to teach really. completed the tests about ios and android without even watching the videos.",1
103729,"This is certainly not an-depth look at smartphone technology. The lecturer just reads aloud the text on screen, without fleshing out the concepts therein or providing any explanation. Anybody can tell me what an acronym stands for - I want to know what these features actually do, how they work, how they're developed.I have no desire to upgrade to the whole package for this course. It's a time waster.",1
103731,Not So help full about Smartphone. Now aday everyone knows What is there in Smartphone.,1
103742,"Absolutely U-S-E-L-E-S-S, at least in the free version.",1
103744,This is only theory related to the evolution of the systems. How their features change over the time.I personally think that it is useless because you really do not learn anything.,1
103746,"I really wonder why this should be a course at an University. It's just some sort of fact-dump of Android and iOS, which ist current, but will be outdated within four weeks (seriously).So, to keep up with this issue, it's just better to read some blogs about this or type ""ios vs android"" in Google.",1
103766,The instructor is very annoying and he talks way too much about non important stuff.,1
103802,"It is a very small introduction to swift, while the last assignment expects you to be rather fluent in programming using swift. A lot of self study using the guides provided by apple and other sources is needed to successfully complete this course.Furthermore the video's indicate a lack of preparedness on part of the instructors as a lot of sentences are cut of halfway , then started a new with a new goal. All of which makes this course very hard to understand. For free it is passable, but had I payed I would sincerely regret itPart 2 is better, but still changing thoughts midway in a sentence",1
103817,"As a professional Instructional Designer, I can attest that this is the poorest-designed course I have ever seen. Regrettably, I paid for the entire specialization up-front, and I cannot get a refund or even a Coursera credit for enrolling in a different specialization.Be aware that the faculty who is the instructor of record does not participate in the course. The video lectures are poorly done, including errors and misstatements that could have been edited out, but it appears that no one bothered to edit the raw footage before uploading it.There is not so much instruction as an overview. There are no coding exercises until the final assignment, which is poorly-described and requires the student to self-teach using outside sources.There are app specializations in Coursera that appear much better-designed. Look elsewhere.",1
103820,"Course content: some Swift specific topics are shortly covered in the videos. Overall, the teaching material is very short. In the first week, students basically learn how to start Xcode. Week four contains a 15 minutes video on image processing, that's basically it for the week.Follow-up readings for week two just provide a link to Apple's iOS Developer site. That's clearly not enough for a course. Students can google for tutorials by themselves.Project: The projects mentions classes, which are not covered in the course. It was then also my impression from the peer reviews, that some students without prior knowledge were just lost.There are many great tutorials on the web which offer more insights and give students a much more fundamental knowledge than this course.",1
103835,"The course was not prepared at all, badly improvised and with no structure. I wish I could have my money back.",1
103843,"this was thefirst course i payed for and unfortunately the worst expierience.lack of content beyond the stuff in the available simple swift tutorials andfrom an eduucational pint of view afwully if at all preparedits as shame that i cannot give this ""course"" ZERO stars which it deserves!i should have checked the very negative feedback of the former participants before bying iti will be much MUCH more alert regarding content on coursera from now on",1
103850,"Worst course I took on Coursera so far! It was my first course I actually paid for and it turned out to be the least useful one. The small number of exercises and videos does not justify the high price of the course. It might have been ok if they had included the iOS parts also, but charging 70 EUR for the first part alone is grossly overpriced.",1
103851,"Although Parham Aarabi is listed as the professor throughout this specialization, it's a bit of a bait-and-switch. Prof Aarabi is an award-winning professor at U of Toronto, but it turns out he knows little about iOS and has Jack Wu teach most of the material. Jack Wu is probably a heck of a developer but he's a terrible instructor.I previously took the Android Specialization, which was excellent, so I was shocked at how bad this course was.",1
103855,Absolutely poor. Avoid. No professor monitoring of the fo,1
103863,Bad content and instructor. no logistic in place. if you are planning to pay to get certificate. I would suggest look else where. my $279 are stuck in here and they don't reply to forum posts.,1
103868,Very bad course.,1
103869,"Certainly not a beginners course. You needed to have a good programming knowledge to make any sense of this course. The final assignment asked you to do things you hadn't been taught. As I hadn't done any programming for 20 years, I certainly found this difficult. Fell behind and there isn't really anyone there to help. Almost asked for a refund but decided to try to continue. I'm struggling to motivate myself into the second course. I really hope it's better than the first one.",1
103871,"The weekly lectures/assignments did little to prepare for the final assignment. They were short and high level without any coding to back them up.It is possible to blaze through the first four weeks in a couple hours.....and then spend weeks on the final assignment because you will need to learn most of it on your own by looking through api documentation.To the instructors: If you want to see what a good ""intro to language"" course looks like, checkout:https://www.coursera.org/course/programming1",1
103872,"It's not a university standard course. It's more like introduction to introduction DIY Swift. The videos are chaotic and lack explications, examples, exercises and practical assignments. Much better intro to Swift can be found on many youtube channels or just on swift documentation website.",1
103876,"The initial lessons were rather chaotic. The idea was good, but the execution was not really good.The significantly improved the quality for the second course so I assume that for a new iteration, the it will be better too.",1
103877,"At first the presentations are really on a semi professional level (copy & paste codes, making errors without knowing the cause). They show a lot what can be done with swift but the never show/mention what it's really usefull for (no ""real life"" usage just snippets after snippets).To few practical doings (mostly only quiz stuff)",1
103880,"This course is a waste of time and money. I'm an experienced programmer, and I thought this would be a good introduction to Swift; it wasn't. The first two weeks were short, introductory programming lessons. Week 3, ""Advanced Swift,"" consisted of one 12-minute video that barely scratches the surface of three separate topics.Many things that I would consider fundamentals for this type of programming course (classes, for example) were rarely even mentioned, much less taught and demonstrated.If you want to learn Swift, look elsewhere. Don't waste your time and money on this course.",1
103881,"I think for somebody who has no prior knowledge in this course will find it difficult to understand. I have taken some introductory courses in swift programming and were much more elaborating than this; for instance, the part ""i think"" in week 4 were Jack Wu explains closures, functions, enums, structs... in less than 10min, i studied that in around 5 hours atleast in other visual tutorials online. in the last lecture on image processing, the instructor gave 16minutes tutorial on manipulating image pixels and then gave a link to a website to explain everything about ImageProcessing, a much heavier topic than working with pixels, and even it was not in Swift but Objective-C which i have no knowledge in that language and it wasnt stated in the course that it was a prerequisite.final assignment is quite vague on the requirements needed by the instructor. would have prefered to have more interaction with the instructors on the assignment atleast. Im not the only one complaining about this issue, you can check the discussion in the course. I guess im fortunate that i have already studied those courses from external sources before i started here.one of the instructors speaks quite fast with alot of anxiety making it quite difficult to understand without repeating the video.",1
103899,Please stay away from this course.,1
103907,"Thank you for this course. It was interesting and helpful. Before.But I failed. I got bad mark and I don't know why.I have only one good comment. But I have 3 bad marks and only 2 good. I am a looser, i guess.So I hate this course, this website, this review system and this world.Thank you again.",1
103916,"Huge gap between videos and final assignment.Videos should be edited, we are not interested in trials and errors of the instructors.",1
103921,Learned more about image processing than Swift.,1
103931,Bad Lecturers and instructions.,1
103933,"This course is a rare example of how it`s not done. Presentation is unstructured.Seems to be a student project where his professor ""helps"" along to check certain topics the student has to include to get a good grade.",1
103935,"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...",1
103939,"Course was the worst I have taken on Coursera. I wish I could have received a refund. The professors were hard to follow, laughed through mistakes and did not do a good job of walking through the course content. I would not recommend this course to anyone.",1
103943,very poor organized.,1
103953,"I'm dropping this course because it's just SO poorly conceived. Three weeks in, and I can't really articulate what I've actually learned (which leads me to believe that the answer is ""not very much""). The major problem is that this course has no clear objective. And I don't mean that the individual lessons don't have objectives - I actually mean that the entire course doesn't know what it wants to be and the instructors seem to have bypassed this critical question. I have a background in Python, and I was under the impression that this course would teach me how to program in Swift (seems like a fairly straightforward goal). But it isn't that at all. If I were to summarize this course (perhaps a little uncharitably, because I'm annoyed at the time I wasted) it would be: some dudes with a computer talk about some cool features of a programming language. I'm fairly baffled by the fact that there was no thought put into which examples might best illustrate the features they were trying to teach. Which-examples-might-best-illustrate-the-feature-I-am-trying-to-teach is pedagogy 101. They would regularly work through examples just to conclude ""actually that's a bad example"". This is pretty strong evidence that there was no lesson planning involved. There were also no practice exercises, no posting of pieces of illustrative code, and hence, no way to actually get good at programming in Swift (unless it's self directed, in which case - why bother with the formality of taking a course on Coursera?).",1
103954,Too difficult to learn for beginners.,1
103955,Need to record the sessions again with more confidence and less errors,1
103958,"Please avoid to take this course! Lessons seems to be, at least, not prepared by the teachers.",1
103960,"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.",1
103961,this is terrible,1
103962,not well prepared course,1
103964,"After 97% of the work completed, I have to admit that this course is NOT GOOD. The instructor is not actually the professor himself, and they do lots of mistakes in the videos. You do not learn anything that helpful, and perhaps the actual Swift documentation is way more clearer than this course is.",1
103965,"poorly planned, irrelevant to the subject test questions.",1
103966,The course seemed not to be prepared with anticipation. I left it because of that.,1
103968,Submission is buggy and final assignment is confusing. Almost more than half of students failed this course because of it.,1
103973,Quality and length of material is mediocre.,1
103977,"No stars for this course, 3 modules I did, and I think is not a valuable course, gives a bad introduction to the language, there are inconsistencies in the theory and knowledge of the language. The preparation of the course is poor, there is no direction, a lot of errors using playground and the instructors hesitate and doubt all the time during the recording of the screen. That's not good point for the prestigious University of Toronto and Coursera. One star for the review is too much, no preparation, lack of security, bad quality.",1
103981,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.,1
103984,"Teachers poorly prepared, explanations ambiguous, it seems that they didn't pay attention to examples and sound of the course.I love Jack Wu written tutorials... way better than videos.",1
103986,I wish I had paid closer attention to the refund policy. The production quality and content did not meet my expectations.,1
103988,"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.",1
103989,The instructors are not well prepared for the course. The material are not well structured.,1
103991,"Sadly, this course is NOT an Introduction to Swift Programming. As a beginner I found this course was not structured and I was confused about the correct steps to take in order to start programming in Swift. No doubt that these guys are knowledgable but they do not plan the course or teach in a linear fashion. Furthermore the sound and video quality is poor and I have decided to quit this course after the first week and a half.",1
103993,"Very disorganized. More than a course, it seems more like 2 students learning along with you. The lessons have 0 preparation and they come up with examples that do not work half of the time during the video itself. I do not recommend this course (and as a matter of fact, the entire specialization) to anyone.",1
103994,It seems the instructor Jack Wu didn't prepare the course material.,1
104000,"I do appreciate the effort put into this course, but as a programming course it is not very didactic.It lacks structure and even the names of classes chosen for the examples seem odd.",1
104001,Bad audio qualityPoor presentationNot for professional developers (perhaps can be fine for beginners),1
104002,Poorly prepared course. Lectutets do not have enough qualified to teach others. It's a shame to pay for this money. I do not expect this from the university of Toronto.,1
104003,"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.",1
104004,"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.",1
104006,"First of all I expected something deeper. First of all this courser is less understandable than ""The Swift Programming Language"" free book from Apple. Before I join the course I have read a few chapters and from my point of view book explains material much much better. The second point – it looks like tutors invent examples during the lesson (on the fly), this is bring a mess. And last thing about this course that tutors commit an gross error during lecture. Please have a look at ""Advanced Swift"" lecture, I am talking about closures. The teacher said that closure captures the copy of outside variable, but this is completely wrong! Closures capture the variable itself, not the variable value",1
104007,"I am dropping the course.Suggestions1) One person talk to the audience...rather than 2 or 3 talking to each other2) Volume and pic quality poor3) Its going too slowly.....just not enough ""meat"" to get me engaged...esp if u compare to the course by Paul Hegarty Stanford",1
104008,It felt like amateur course. the volume was very low and was missing videos,1
104009,They taught NOTHING!,1
104102,Each week is a very light overview of a topic. There is little to no connection between the topics. The course is not rigorous enough. I felt at the end of the course I didn't learn anything.,1
104107,As usually Johns Hopkins offers very disappointing courses because of their boring lectures and senseless quizzes.,1
104141,Without any discussion forum and at least a mentor this course has nothing new to offer than a You Tube video. There are some inconsistency in the materials as well. Alluring student by the name of UCI and giving the students the worst is hypocrisy.,1
104226,I feel like the lectures were short summaries - not actual college level lectures. I really don't feel I learned anything.,1
104228,"I learned next to nothing from this course; the professor just rambles on and on jumping schizophrenically from aspect of aspect. One moment he's talking about physics, and in the same sentence he's suddenly talking about whether the game should have a crafting system. Some of the information even seems out of touch.He doesn't state any information with certainty because he always tends to add ""or not!"" or ""...maybe!"" after sentences, leaving you to wonder if there's anything left to take away from the lessons. The entire course could be condensed down into a ""list of questions to think about while designing your game world"" - it really doesn't contain anything more than that.Sometimes entire segments are dedicated to trivial things (such as ""your game could have invisible walls!""), whereas in other segments he works through a hundred different questions without going in-depth to any of them.Speaker is hard to understand due to his lack of proficiency with the English language and the subtitles are often incorrect.On the plus side, you will learn what a ""ha-ha"" is.",1
104240,Incredibly vague and hand wavy. I didn't feel like I had to write anything down.,1
104273,It's often not clear the point the professor of this course is trying to make. Instead he often seems to ramble pointing out a 100 little questions that a world designer might ask himself/herself during the process without ever focusing on any. The reader is left not knowing what the key take aways were,1
104316,worst course forever,1
104330,This course needs too much C/C++ knowledge and the test are far too code oriented. You have to give textual answers without having enough help for memory calculation.,1
104389,"Unnecessary extra videos, that could and should be joined together. In particular, in lessons 2 and 3 all ""topic introductions"" could be joined with the following ""let's discuss this topic inside a DAW"" video.Awful dynamic range. In some videos voice of lector is very quiet (-20 dB or less) and sound played from the DAW is much louder (around -6 dB). In other videos, the opposite: loud lector and quiet DAW. Change of microphone setup between intro video and ""in the DAW"" video is also very noticeable and distracting.Repeats of repeats over repeats. This is not needed at all. I could repeat everything by myself, just pause video and replay interesting fragment. I don't need to be reminded how a single background vocal sounds or that we need to change panning each time we add new track. Yes, It should be done from time to time, but not each time. These repeats make the lessons unnecessary long, it feels I could have been told the same information in half of time or less.This combines with very slow pace of a lector. I listened all lessons on 1.5 or even 2.0 tempo, just to not fall asleep.Quizzes are strange. Stupid quesion appeared in quiz three: which key combinations we use in the videos? But why do you ever ask this, how this relates to the topic? I use another DAW in another OS, I even don't have a ""command"" key, I could have changed my hot keys, so your particular hot key setup is not any significance for me. I was expected to be quizzed for which parameters to tune, how it sounds and alike, not this particular crap. Trust me, anyone could figure which hot keys to use. I am not just a monkey, I have an ability to explore my software by myself, I don't need to be told how to copy and paste, and even if I need this I just go look in the manual.",1
104483,The course was choppy,1
104492,It's format needs a good narrator not based on stupid commercials.,1
104498,Extremely boring teacher,1
104499,High on opinion and low on scholarship.,1
104501,"The false comparison between religion and soul beliefs cloud the validity of the course. Maybe the intent was to only show the worst case ""Soul Beliefs"" then shoot them down. However, at least to me, the instructor seemed to extrapolate ""some beliefs"" to ""all beliefs"".",1
104511,well taught but not what I thought it would be.,1
104545,Very disappointed at the lack of notes and course material. I hope part 5/5 improves.,1
104553,It's not worth the price.,1
104579,Outdated course that needs a lot of changes to your code and in releases so you can follow professors code.A lot of people had same issues.,1
104616,"Repetitive content, like the latter course, not challenging",1
104648,"This course is not worth taking, especially if you have to pay for it! It is boring and you hardly learn anything. Do not take this class, it is not worth your money.",1
104733,"The structure is not clear, with similar ideas coming up several times. Examples can be far-fetched (Britannica for ethical blindness ?). The teachers read the script and sometimes stumble on the words. An idea is explained in 3 minutes when 30s are enough. I am getting bored and very disappointed because it is a very important topics these days. I quit. Thank you anyways",1
104770,Poor quality audio. Monotonous lecture style with frequent inaccuracies in delivery (says one thing but actually means another). I found my motivation and performance dropped sharply in contrast to prior lectures in this series.,1
104785,"Important material, poorly taught.",1
104789,"Not explained well, had to take another statistical inference course. Not worth the money.",1
104795,"So far this is the poorest course in DS specialiation. Coins and dices all the time, Brian reads to the camera. It is just like reading a book, a very boring one. Examples from real life could boost interest.",1
104811,Very disappointing!!!!!!!too much emphasis on mathematical notations....where are the practical applications?lack of examples....it seemed more of a prose than a lecture....would not recommend to a beginner.Period,1
104814,"Covers basic statistics (Mean, Variance, Simple Z and T tests). Not what I was expecting as Inference. Multiple testing of data is a sign of poor experimental design and should be avoided, not adjusted for. Bootstrapping is not a new idea and has been used in other fields.",1
104825,"I've not found this course organized pedagogically speaking. The organization, insofar as ""here is a list of stuff I'll be teaching"" makes sense. But a lot of the ""teaching"" is ill suited for someone looking to learn with a minimal statistical background. It's incredibly frustrating and disheartening.",1
104844,"The only reason for enrolling is to complete the data science specialization, though it may make you reconsider continuing with it. The instructor and provided materials fail to adequately explain the concepts this course is supposed to cover, and do not prepare students for the quizzes or assignments. If you don't know statistics you won't learn it here. If you know statistics, you don't need this course.",1
104855,"1) Not worth the money and time. The reason I say this is because the same concepts are reviewed and explained in lot more fun, creative, and interactive manner at other free of cost resources like Khan academy, youTube channels, etc2) Who is the audience? I don't think instructor has any idea of target audience. Are these meant for novice or advanced learners ?3) Why so serious? My philosophy is that if I want to appear in video, i better learn to cheer up. Seriously i mean after dealing with rush hour traffic and psychopath boss, I don't want to see a unhappy serious looking face throughout a course. Not good for my heart!Sorry if it is a mean (not statistic mean!) or anything but I have come here investing my money and time (out of my family time) . And I am not happy with this course.The only reason I have to complete this course is because of the requirement in specialization degree. I won't mind getting my refund back on this course.",1
104857,"There are better (Free!) courses out there to learn basic inferential statistics. Khan Academy is a great place to start, and Udacity has a great class that gives a good intuitive understanding. The main reason to take this class is if you are trying to finish the entire Data Science program. Otherwise, look elsewhere for an intro stats class. The instructor clearly knows the material, the class just does not do a good job of transfering that knowledge.",1
104858,The instructor is about as convoluted as you can possibly get with his explanations.,1
104868,worst course of the specialization.,1
104874,"Personally, I feel that the way of sharing and teaching was assuming everyone is an expert in this subject. This course need to be reviewed to make it more suitable to various groups of profession as not everyone has the same level of mathematics background.",1
104875,The slides are very difficult to follow. It could be better designed,1
104880,Very difficult to understand and follow,1
104883,Too much covered.,1
104886,"Terrible instruction in the videos and unclear directions. I'd avoid this course if possible, but it's required for the specialization. New videos should be shot and inspiration taken from more instructive and interesting guides, like The Cartoon Guide to Statistics by Gonick & Smith.",1
104891,"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"".",1
104892,To be honest I don't think this is worth the money.,1
104905,"The worst course I've ever taken.Bad sound quality, dead discussion forums, not possible to understand material without external (not mentioned in the course) sources.",1
104907,"I've taken several statistics, data science, and R courses. This is one of the worst. I took others' advice, and I also strongly suggest looking to other sources to learn Statistical Inference before taking this course. Khan Academy, DataCamp, Udacity, Duke (Coursera), and Columbia (edX) all have great courses. Though they vary in depth, each leaves you with a good understanding of the concepts they teach.",1
104924,The course is very difficult to comprehend..Moreover the examplanations given ar not concise and brief..,1
104930,"This course is very difficult to follow, not because the topics are hard or too technical but mostly due to lecturer's poor job in explaining and creating a narrative.",1
104931,"Do NOT recommend. Very poorly explained. Refers to some concepts without introducing, introduces others without explaining. Spends most of the time looking to the computer screen instead of toward you and reading the text instead of explaining in understandable manner.",1
104932,"Content covered in this course was hard to learn, both because it was pitched at a level that realistically was more akin to a wrap up of content already covered (when in fact it was all new content) and because the instructor, Brian Caffo, has not a style that was conducive to teaching.The instructor often would launch into a topic, and then speed through a calculation with basically no explanation.In terms of time, this was one of the most intensive courses in the specialisation, and I'd recommend taking this course alone (not concurrently with other courses) for that very reason.",1
104935,"poor course, saturated, with an instructer that uses big words and does not explain many difficult ideas, and take for granted that the leaner knows a lot of probability and statistics.",1
104937,"Many videos lacked associated pdf slides so confusing to watch. Some topics on slides were not covered in videos. A supplemental video for those would be great even of optional.Brian Cato is a good presenter, however, more examples needed to be done showing how to work out various statistical problems both by traditional method and using R.",1
104941,"The worst professor in this specialization. The subject really interesting, and I have been studying for a while in my Master's and PhD in engineering, so I could understand the bulk of the course. This is a very important subject in data analysis and these poor explained classes could make lot of people give up the specialization. Statistics involves much of mathematics and calculus which make it a natural challenge for most of the people. Please, improve these classes in order not to disappoint the student who want to become data scientists.",1
104946,"This is 3rd time I a trying this course. Labeling someone just reading the slides out loud as a course is ridiculous. I have to express that this is horrible, Please don't callout a course. Call it Audio Slides.I have a Master's degree in engineering and have won scholarship all my life. This is the first time I am trying out on-line course. The courses were okay till I came to this sections mostly done by Brian Jaffe. Knowing and teaching is two different things, Brian! I will continue, with help from other materials outside the course. But I have ti rate this as 1 star.",1
104951,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.,1
104958,"This course, which is part of Data Science Specialization Course, which is a BEGINNER specialization, doesn't explain as it should to BEGINNERS. They try to explain, complex topics in 3 minutes ... If I didn't need the certificate, I would definitely not waste my time on this course. Youtube videos from khan academy or Brandon Foltz (Statistics 101) are much more valuable, you really get the topic and they are free. The professors didn't want to spend time preparing good material, from my point of view, the preparation is very poor.The course is more oriented to teach you to be a ""data monkey"". You know the code you need to write, but you don't get what are you doing ... Where do these formulas come from?",1
104960,"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.",1
104967,"Seeking out supplemental material is not only helpful, but necessary. This course does not provide a foundation of knowledge for inferential statistics so much as present several equations and functions and describe how one might use them.",1
104991,"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.",1
104992,Cant understand whats going on,1
104993,Explanations not clear and feels like he's reading rather than explaining things.Consecutive videos feel like they are disconnected. Videos stop in the middle of him talking something. Thank god for the swirl assignments which make things much clearer!Also the course proceed very fast not giving enough time to the concepts.,1
105006,Heavy contents.. Unable to cover a week's material in a week,1
105015,Get ready for a lot of frustration and independent research. For being able to complete the course on continuous delivery the videos of the course are not a great help.,1
105139,"not on topic, not honest, and dogmatic.also the auto emails continue after unsubscribing from the course.",1
105160,"Sorry but the variable ""peer"" reviews ruined this course for me, I either did not get enough reviews or a ""prankster"" would down mark for whatever reason they had in their head at that particular moment. the staff don't seem interested in this a a problem. and there is no way to rate a bad reviewer so they get away with it.the other courses in the specialisation are great, but this one gives very little in the way of tuition and relies on the whole on peers, which for me didn't work out too well",1
105267,"It does allow the purchase of a specific course within the specialization, the student has to subscribe to the all specialization even if they are only interested in one course only. Secondly the owner of this course should have allowed at the assignment to be submitted, because some people purchase a course only right after they have completed it.",1
105281,"Started in middle of everything, its course covers 5 to 7 factor samples, in the final exam the minimum factors is 70 or more!You not will learn R, not really business insights, but you learn some specific cases.I think you will learn lots of betters course in this site.",1
105284,"Much trivial content, but advertised as an expert course. Further, the assignments did not work properly at the beginning and there is no timely response of staff. I would not waste money on that course again and will probably try to get refund in time.",1
105290,"English is horrible, and I am french...",1
105295,I wish this course was for free with the assignments!,1
105412,"The title of this course is Paradoxes of War. One of the paradoxes is how little paradox there is in war, after reviewing and reflecting on the lectures and the reading materials.",1
105429,After almost a year I am still waiting to receive my grade of 90%+ for c,1
105447,"It said it could be done on your schedule, but that is not true. I want to withdraw from this stupid course - it sucks.",1
105469,New format makes it impossible to watch off-line.,1
105472,My initial impressions are of astounding mediocrity. Amazes me how academic careers are made these days.,1
105811,"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.",1
105943,very watered down,1
105986,"The distributions were not well explained, it could have been handled in a much better way!",1
106024,very low length to content ratio; basic content,1
106035,"I can't even make pre-course survey, which couldn't have wrong answers",1
106040,"I attempted to take this course because I really wanted to learn more about the US Constitution and how it applies to my daily life. I made it to week three before I could no longer keep listening to Professor Amar drone on and turn a 10 minute lecture into a 25 minute lecture with filler words, tangents and lack of structure. Professor Amar is very knowledgeable about the Constitution and I don't doubt his credentials or accomplishments. However, with out an outline, slides, notes, structure... something... anything... this class is just a talking head that is painfully hard to pay attention to. If you're an auditory learner and prefer the old school, pretentious, Ivy League lecture hall format this is the class for you.",1
106062,The instructor just rambles on and on... there is no structure to the lectures.,1
106104,The teachers have a strong Spanish accent and they fail in what they try to teach: improving.,1
106216,This was the worst course I have taken with ASU on Coursera. Feedback was minimal and the system had many technical issues. Videos didn't start properly and there was no help or feedback from the instructors or the peers. I have wasted a lot of time resubmitting my assignments due to technical issues. Waste of my time.,1
106218,The entire course was not paced well. The capstone had as much work each week as the other courses had in the entire 6 week course. To make it worse for me the capstone came up at the end of the year when teachers are overloaded already. I ended up having to roll over to the next session 1/2 way through. Work should have been better spread out. I also do not like that you get no real teacher evaluation in a capstone. Meaning a student could take a full 8 courses over a year and then fail when the teachers finally look at all the work in the second capstone.,1
106233,"Sadly, there only english subtitles in the first video, so I can´t continue the course",1
106237,It said it was subtitled into English but that's only the first video...,1
106238,ONly in chinese. Not English subtitles.,1
106239,"Need more (understandable) subtitles. Peer-review for this course is not a good idea as well, given abstract concepts and different language.",1
106241,The instructor looks nerves when he talking.,1
106298,The course focuses more on the theoretical side with no practical examples. It also does not explain these theoretical concepts in detail enough. It was difficult for me as a new learner in the text analytics field to follow such dense theoretical concepts.,1
106302,"You need to pay to participate in the quizzes. Stay clear, there are free alternatives out there",1
106403,the cost,1
106442,"It is very very bad that only students assess the assignments. Lots of students can't count sentences, can't see and generally are very negligent in evaluating the work of others. No teachers involve the process. No appelation possibility, no forum for discussions!",1
106541,"The information was interesting but sort of long. In fact, I started this so long ago that I don't remember most of what was said, only that it was long. I did enjoy the first course, America's Written Constitution but someone was paying attention then and it was on the older format so it was better. I rate the course so poorly, however, because of the total lack of staff involvement and the worthless peer review papers. I have a huge problem with the peer review process. It is of no value and should be banned. Be that as it may, however, it takes weeks to get reviews and there is NO ONE FROM THE COURSE STAFF PAYING ANY ATTENTION TO THE COURSE!! There is not one posting from course staff in the forums. There has been no response to any of the so called, ""comment on this assignment"" messages I've been leaving since JULY. There has been no response to an e-mail, supposedly sent to the instructor on my behalf by the Coursera help desk weeks ago. It is obvious that the instructor has abandoned this course. If no one is going to pay attention to it, it should be taken down. If you just want the information, watch the videos but don't expect anything else, including any response whatsoever from this course. I've wasted too much time on this. I'm done.",1
106574,"Its really hard to communicate with Coursera. I have paid for the course, havent enrolled due to my illness and there is nobody who can help me out with this.Its a very nice project ""Coursera"" but still has too much to make up... what a pity.Martin",1
106652,"This review is for Coursera. Why you want me to click 2 times to submit a review? On home screen when i click on stars to review, new window opens.. This is not a great UX.. Please reduce no of clicks that a user has to make to submit the reviews.",1
106675,"way too slow and too long ; too many digressions, by-side remarks, lessons of life, etc ... go straight to the point.",1
106681,"The course is very cheap. However, training material has poor quality.",1
106692,"Purely theoretical, I doesnt go deep enough, there arent any assignments, only a quiz at the end of the week. Poor material per week.",1